81_FR_67383 81 FR 67193 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status for the Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake

81 FR 67193 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status for the Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 190 (September 30, 2016)

Page Range67193-67214
FR Document2016-23538

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine threatened species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended, for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus), a rattlesnake species found in 10 States and 1 Canadian Province. The rule adds this species to the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. We have also determined that the designation of critical habitat for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is not prudent due to an increased risk of collection and persecution.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67193-67214]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23538]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2015-0145; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-BA98


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species 
Status for the Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnake

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine 
threatened species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
(Act), as amended, for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus 
catenatus), a rattlesnake species found in 10 States and 1 Canadian 
Province. The rule adds this species to the Federal List of Endangered 
and Threatened Wildlife. We have also determined that the designation 
of critical habitat for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is not 
prudent due to an increased risk of collection and persecution.

DATES: This rule is effective October 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/reptiles/eama/index.html. Comments and materials we received, as well as 
supporting documentation we used in preparing this rule, are available 
for public inspection at http://www.regulations.gov or by appointment, 
during normal business hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Chicago Ecological Services Field Office, 230 South Dearborn, Suite 
2938, Chicago, IL 60604; telephone 312-216-4720.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louise Clemency, Field Supervisor, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chicago Ecological Services Field 
Office, 230 South Dearborn, Suite 2938, Chicago, IL 60604; telephone 
312-216-4720. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf 
(TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-
8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

    Why we need to publish a rule. Under the Act, a species may warrant 
protection through listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range. Listing a species as an 
endangered species or threatened species can only be completed by 
issuing a rule. Additionally, under the Act, critical habitat shall be 
designated, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, for any 
species determined to be an endangered species or threatened species 
under the Act. We have determined that designating critical habitat is 
not prudent for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake due to an increased 
risk of collection and persecution.
    This rule makes final the listing of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus) as a threatened species.
    The basis for our action. Under the Act, we can determine that a 
species is an endangered or threatened species based on any of five 
factors: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) 
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its 
continued existence. Although there are several factors that are 
affecting the eastern massasauga rattlesnake's status, the loss of 
habitat was historically, and continues to be, the primary threat, 
either through development or through changes in habitat structure due 
to vegetative succession.
    Peer review and public comment. A Species Status Assessment (SSA) 
team prepared an SSA report (Szymanski et al. 2016) for the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake. The SSA team was composed of Service 
biologists, in consultation with other species experts. The SSA 
represents a compilation of the best available scientific and 
commercial data concerning the biological status of the species, 
including the impacts of past, present, and future factors (both 
negative and beneficial) affecting the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. 
We sought comments on the SSA from independent specialists to ensure 
that our determination is based on scientifically sound data, 
assumptions, and analyses. We invited these peer reviewers to comment 
on our listing proposal. We also considered all comments and 
information we received during the comment period.
    The SSA report underwent independent peer review by 21 scientists 
with expertise in eastern massasauga rattlesnake biology, habitat 
management, and stressors (factors negatively affecting the species) to 
the species. The SSA report and other materials relating to this 
determination can be found on the Midwest Region Web site at http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/ and at http://www.regulations.gov under 
Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2015-0145.

Previous Federal Actions

    On September 30, 2015, the Service published a proposed rule (80 FR 
58688) to list the eastern massasauga rattlesnake as a threatened 
species under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). We accepted public 
comments on the proposed rule for 60 days, ending November 30, 2015. 
Please refer to the proposed rule (80 FR 58688; September 30, 2015) for 
a detailed description of previous Federal actions concerning this 
species.

Background

    Please refer to the proposed listing rule (80 FR 58688; September 
30, 2015) for a summary of species information.

Summary of Biological Status and Threats

    The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an 
endangered species or a threatened species because of any factors 
affecting its continued existence. We completed a comprehensive 
assessment of the biological status of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake, and prepared the SSA report, which provides a thorough 
description of the species' overall viability. We generally defined 
viability as the ability of the species to maintain self-sustaining 
populations over the long term. We used the conservation biology 
principles of resiliency, representation, and redundancy in our 
analysis. Briefly, resiliency is the ability of the species to 
withstand environmental stochasticity (unpredictable fluctuations in 
environmental conditions (for example, wet or dry, warm or cold 
years)); redundancy is the ability of the species to withstand 
catastrophic events (for example, droughts, hurricanes); and 
representation is the ability of the species to adapt over time to 
long-term

[[Page 67194]]

changes in the environment (for example, climate changes). In general, 
the more redundant, representative, and resilient a species is, the 
more likely it is to sustain populations over time, even under changing 
environmental conditions. Using these principles, we considered the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake's needs at the individual, population, 
and species scales. We also identified the beneficial factors and 
stressors influencing the species' viability. We considered the degree 
to which the species' ecological needs are met both currently and as 
can be reliably forecasted into the future, and we assessed the 
consequences of any unmet needs as they relate to species viability. In 
this section, we summarize the conclusions of the SSA, which can be 
accessed in the SSA report at http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/ 
and at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R3-ES-2015-0145.
    For survival and reproduction at the individual level, the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake requires appropriate habitat, which varies 
depending on the season and its life stage (see Background section of 
the proposed listing rule at 80 FR 58688, September 30, 2015). During 
the winter (generally October through March), they occupy hibernacula, 
such as crayfish burrows. Hydrology at eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
sites is important in maintaining conditions with high enough water 
levels to support the survival of hibernating eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes. During their active season (after they emerge from 
hibernacula), they require sparse canopy cover and sunny areas 
(intermixed with shaded areas) for thermoregulation (basking and 
retreat sites), abundant prey (foraging sites), and the ability to 
escape predators (retreat sites). Habitat structure, including early 
successional stage and low canopy cover, appears to be more important 
for eastern massasauga rattlesnake habitat than plant community 
composition or soil type. Maintaining such habitat structure may 
require periodic management of most habitat types occupied by the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake.
    At the population level, the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
requires sufficient population size, population growth, survivorship 
(the number of individuals that survive over time), recruitment (adding 
individuals to the population through birth or immigration), and 
population structure (the number and age classes of both sexes) to be 
sustainable over the long term. Populations also require a sufficient 
quantity of high-quality microhabitats with intact hydrological and 
ecological processes that maintain suitable habitat, and connectivity 
among these microhabitats. In the SSA report, a self-sustaining 
population of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes is defined as one that is 
demographically, genetically, and physiologically robust (a population 
with 50 or more adult females and a stable or increasing growth rate), 
with a high level of persistence (a probability of persistence greater 
than 0.9) given its habitat conditions and the risk or beneficial 
factors operating on it.
    We relied on a population-specific model developed by Faust et al. 
(2011, entire) (hereafter referred to as the Faust model) to assess the 
health of populations across the eastern massasauga rattlesnake's 
range. Faust and colleagues developed a generic, baseline model for a 
hypothetical, healthy (growing) eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
population. Using this baseline model and site-specific information, 
including population size estimate, stressors operating at the site, 
and potential future management changes that might address those 
stressors, the Faust model forecasted the future condition of 57 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations over three different time 
spans (10, 25, and 50 years) (for more details on the Faust model, see 
pp. 4-6 in the SSA report). We extrapolated the Faust model results and 
supplemental information gathered since 2011 to forecast the future 
conditions of the other (non-modeled; n = 290) eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake populations.
    At the species level, the eastern massasauga rattlesnake requires 
multiple (redundant), self-sustaining (resilient) populations 
distributed across areas of genetic and ecological diversity 
(representative) to be sustainable over the long term. Using the 
literature on distribution of genetic diversity across the range of 
this species, we identified three geographic ``analysis units'' 
corresponding to ``clumped'' genetic variation patterns across the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations (see Figure 1, below). A 
reasonable conclusion from the composite of genetic studies that exist 
(Gibbs et al. 1997, entire; Andre 2003, entire; Chiucchi and Gibbs 
2010, entire; Ray et al. 2013, entire) is that there are broad-scale 
genetic differences across the range of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake, and within these broad units, there is genetic diversity 
among populations comprising the broad units. Thus, we interpret these 
genetic variation patterns to represent areas of unique adaptive 
diversity. We subsequently use these analysis units (western, central, 
and eastern) to structure our analysis of viability with regards to 
representation.

Species' Current Condition

    The documented historical range of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake included sections of western New York, western 
Pennsylvania, southeastern Ontario, the upper and lower peninsulas of 
Michigan, the northern two-thirds of Ohio and Indiana, the northern 
three-quarters of Illinois, the southern half of Wisconsin, extreme 
southeast Minnesota, east-central Missouri, and the eastern third of 
Iowa. The limits of the current range of the species resemble the 
boundaries of its historical range; however, the geographic 
distribution of extant localities has been restricted by the loss of 
populations from much of the area within the boundaries of that range. 
As a result of the stressors acting on eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
populations, the resiliency of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
across its range and within each of the three analysis units has 
declined from its historically known condition. Rangewide, there are 
558 known historical eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations, of 
which 263 are known to still be extant, 211 are likely extirpated or 
known extirpated, and 84 are of unknown status. For the purposes of our 
assessment, we considered all populations with extant or unknown 
statuses to be currently extant (referred to as presumed extant, n = 
347). Of those 347 populations presumed extant, 40 percent (n = 139) 
are likely quasi-extirpated (have 25 or fewer adult females, which was 
considered by the Faust model to be too small to be viable (see the SSA 
report, pp. 46-47, for details)).
    The rangewide number of presumed extant populations has declined 
from the number that was known historically by 38 percent (and 24 
percent of the presumed extant populations have unknown statuses). Of 
those populations presumed extant, 139 (40 percent) are presumed to be 
quasi-extirpated while 105 (30 percent) are presumed to be 
demographically, genetically, and physiologically robust (see Table 1, 
below). Of these presumed demographically, genetically, and 
physiologically robust populations, 19 (0.5 percent of the presumed 
extant populations) are presumed to have conditions (stressors 
affecting the species at those populations are nonexistent or of low 
impact) suitable for maintaining populations over time and, thus, are 
self-sustaining. The greatest declines in resiliency occurred in the 
western analysis unit, where only 20 populations are presumed extant,

[[Page 67195]]

and, of these, only 1 population is presumed to be self-sustaining. 
Loss of resiliency has also occurred, although to a lesser degree, in 
the central and eastern analysis units, where only 23 and 6 
populations, respectively, are presumed to be self-sustaining.

         Table 1--The Number of Populations by Status Rangewide
        [DGP = demographically, genetically, and physiologically]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Number of      Percentage  of
                Status                   populations    presumed  extant
                                          rangewide       populations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Presumed Extant......................             347  .................
Quasi-extirpated.....................             139               40
DGP robust...........................             105               30
Self-sustaining......................              19                0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The degree of representation, as measured by spatial extent of 
occurrence (a measurement of the spatial spread of the areas currently 
occupied by a species), across the range of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake has declined, as illustrated by the higher proportion of 
populations lost in the southern and western part of the range and by 
the loss of area occupied within the analysis units (see Figure 1, 
below; see also pp. 52-55 in the SSA report). Overall, there has been 
more than a 41 percent reduction of extent of occurrence (as measured 
by a reduction in area) rangewide (see Table 2, below). This loss has 
not been uniform, with the western analysis unit encompassing most of 
this decline (70 percent reduction in extent of occurrence in the 
western analysis unit). However, losses of 33 percent and 26 percent of 
the extent of occurrence in the central analysis unit and eastern 
analysis unit, respectively, are notable as well. The results are not a 
true measure of area occupied by the species, but rather a coarse 
evaluation to make relative comparison among years. The reasons for 
this are twofold: (1) The calculations are done at the county, rather 
than the population, level; and (2) if at least one population was 
projected to be extant, the entire county was included in the analysis, 
even if other populations in the county were projected to be 
extirpated. Assuming that the loss of extent of occurrence equates to 
loss of adaptive diversity, the degree of representation of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake has declined since historical conditions.

[[Page 67196]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30SE16.026


 Table 2--The Percent Reduction in Extent of Occurrence From Historical
                             to Present Day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Percent
                      Analysis unit                          reduction
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western.................................................              70
Central.................................................              33
Eastern.................................................              26
Rangewide...............................................              41
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The redundancy of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake has also 
declined since historical conditions. We evaluated the effects of 
potential catastrophic drought events on the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake. Extreme fluctuations in the water table may negatively 
affect body condition for the following active season, cause early 
emergence, or cause direct mortality (Harvey and Weatherhead 2006, p. 
71; Smith 2009, pp. vii, 33, 38-39). Changes in water levels under 
certain circumstances can cause mortality to individuals, particularly 
during hibernation (Johnson et al. 2000, p. 26; Kingsbury 2002, p. 38), 
when the snakes are underwater. The water in the hibernacula protects 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake from dehydration and freezing, and, 
therefore, dropping water levels in the winter leaves the snakes 
vulnerable to both (Kingsbury 2002, p. 38; Moore and Gillingham 2006, 
p. 750; Smith 2009, p. 5). Because individual eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes often return to the same hibernacula year after year, 
dropping water levels in hibernacula could potentially decimate an 
entire population if the majority of individuals in that population 
hibernate in the same area.
    We assessed the vulnerability of unit-wide extirpation due to 
varying drought intensities, as summarized below (for a detailed 
description of the analysis, see the SSA report, pp. 55-60, 81-82). The 
Drought Monitor (a weekly map of drought conditions that is produced 
jointly by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the National Drought Mitigation 
Center (NDMC) at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln) classifies general 
drought areas by intensity, with D1 being the least intense drought and 
D4 being the most intense drought. For the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake, the risk of unit-wide extirpation due to a catastrophic 
drought varies by analysis unit and by the level of drought considered. 
Experts believe drought intensities of magnitude D2 or higher are 
likely to make the species more vulnerable to overwinter mortality and 
cause catastrophic impacts to eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
populations. In the central and eastern analysis units, the annual 
frequency rate for a D3 or D4 drought is zero, so there is little to no 
risk of unit-wide extirpation regardless of how broadly dispersed the 
species is within the unit. In the eastern analysis unit, the annual 
frequency rate for a D2 drought is also zero. Portions of the central 
analysis unit are at risk of a D2-level catastrophic drought; 
populations in the southern portion of the central analysis unit and 
scattered portions in the north are at risk from such a drought. In the 
western analysis unit, the risk of unit-wide extirpation based on the 
frequency of a D3 drought is low, but the risk of

[[Page 67197]]

losing clusters of populations within the western analysis unit is 
notable; 5 of the 8 population clusters are vulnerable to a 
catastrophic drought. The probability of unit-wide extirpation in the 
western analysis unit is notably higher with D2 frequency rates; 7 of 
the 8 clusters of populations are at risk of D2-level catastrophic 
drought. Thus, the probability of losing most populations within the 
western analysis unit due to a catastrophic drought is high (0.82 
probability of unit-wide extirpation).

Assessment of Threats and Conservation Measures

    The most prominent stressors affecting the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake include habitat loss and fragmentation, especially through 
development and vegetative succession; road mortality; hydrologic 
alteration (hydrologic drawdown) resulting in drought or artificial 
flooding; persecution; collection; and mortality of individuals as a 
result of habitat management that includes post-emergent (after 
hibernation) prescribed fire and mowing for habitat management. Habitat 
loss includes direct habitat destruction of native land types (for 
example, grassland, swamp, fen, bog, wet prairie, sedge meadow, 
marshland, peatland, floodplain forest, coniferous forest) due to 
conversion to agricultural land, development, and infrastructure 
associated with development (roads, bridges). Because eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake habitat varies seasonally and also varies over 
its range, the destruction of parts of a population's habitat (for 
example, hibernacula or gestational sites) may cause a negative effect 
to individual snakes, thus reducing the numbers of individuals in a 
population and, in turn, reducing the viability of that population. 
Habitat is also lost due to invasion of nonnative plant species, dam 
construction, fire suppression, manipulation of ground water levels, 
and other incompatible habitat modifications (Jellen 2005, p. 33). 
These habitat losses continue even in publicly held areas protected 
from development.
    Vegetative succession is a major contributor to habitat loss of the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Johnson and Breisch 1993, pp. 50-53; 
Reinert and Buskar 1992, pp. 56-58). The open vegetative structure, 
typical of eastern massasauga rattlesnake habitat, provides the 
desirable thermoregulatory areas, increases prey densities by enhancing 
the growth of sedges and grasses, and provides retreat sites. 
Degradation of eastern massasauga rattlesnake habitat typically happens 
through woody vegetation encroachment or the introduction of nonnative 
plant species. These events alter the structure of the habitat and make 
it unsuitable for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake by reducing and 
eventually eliminating thermoregulatory and retreat areas. Fire 
suppression has promoted vegetative succession and led to the 
widespread loss of open canopy habitats through succession (Kingsbury 
2002, p. 37). Alteration in habitat structure and quality can also 
affect eastern massasauga rattlesnakes by reducing the forage for the 
species' prey base (Kingsbury 2002, p. 37).
    Roads, bridges, and other structures constructed in eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake habitat fragment the snakes' habitat and impact 
the species both through direct mortality as snakes are killed trying 
to cross these structures (Shepard et al. 2008b, p. 6), as well as 
indirectly through the loss of access to habitat components necessary 
for the survival of the snakes.
    Because of the fear and negative perception of snakes, many people 
have a low interest in snakes or their conservation and consequently 
large numbers of snakes are deliberately killed (Whitaker and Shine 
2000, p. 121; Alves et al. 2014, p. 2). Human-snake encounters 
frequently result in the death of the snake (Whitaker and Shine 2000, 
pp. 125-126). Given the species' site fidelity and ease of capture once 
located, the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is particularly susceptible 
to collection. Poaching and unauthorized collection of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake for the pet trade is a factor contributing to 
declines in this species (for example, Jellen 2005, p. 11; Baily et al. 
2011, p. 171).
    Assessing the occurrence of the above-mentioned stressors, we found 
that 94 percent of the presumed extant eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
populations have at least one stressor (with some degree of impact on 
the species) currently affecting the site. Habitat loss or modification 
is the most commonly occurring stressor (see Figure 2, below). Some 
form of habitat loss or modification is occurring at 55 percent of the 
sites; 3 percent of these sites are at risk of total habitat loss (all 
habitat at the site being destroyed or becoming unusable by the 
species). Fragmentation is the second most common factor (49 percent of 
sites), and unmanaged vegetative succession is the third most common 
factor (31 percent of sites). Among the other stressors, road mortality 
occurs at 20 percent, collection or persecution at 17 percent, water 
fluctuation at 7 percent, and pre- or post-emergent fire at less than 1 
percent of the sites.

[[Page 67198]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30SE16.027

    We also considered the magnitude of impact of the various stressors 
(see Figure 3, below). The Faust model indicates that the stressors 
most likely to push a population to quasi-extirpation within 25 years 
(high magnitude stressors) are late-stage vegetative succession, high 
habitat fragmentation, moderate habitat fragmentation, total habitat 
loss, and moderate habitat loss or modification. Our analysis shows 
that 84 percent of eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations are 
impacted by at least one high magnitude stressor, and 63 percent are 
affected by multiple high magnitude stressors. These stressors are 
chronic and are expected to continue with a similar magnitude of impact 
into the future, unless ameliorated by increased implementation of 
conservation actions. Furthermore, these multiple factors are not 
acting independently, but are acting together, which can result in 
cumulative effects that lower the overall viability of the species. For 
a description of the methods used in this threats assessment, refer to 
pages 39-43 of the SSA report.

[[Page 67199]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30SE16.028

    In addition to the above stressors, other factors may be affecting 
individuals. Disease (whether new or currently existing at low levels 
but increasing in prevalence) is another emerging and potentially 
catastrophic stressor to eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations. In 
the eastern and Midwestern United States, the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake is specifically vulnerable to disease due to Ophidiomyces 
fungal infections (snake fungal disease (SFD)). The emergence of SFD 
has been recently documented in the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
(Allender et al. 2011, pp. 2383-2384) and many other reptiles 
(Cheatwood et al. 2003, pp. 333-334; Clark et al. 2011, p. 890; 
Par[eacute] et al. 2003, pp. 12-13; Rajeev et al. 2009, pp. 1265-1267; 
Sigler et al. 2013, pp. 3343-3344; Sleeman 2013, p. 1), and is 
concerning because of its broad geographic and taxonomic distributions. 
However, we did not have sufficient information on the emergence and 
future spread of SFD or other diseases to reliably model this stressor 
for forecasting future conditions for the rattlesnake. Our quantitative 
modeling analysis also does not consider two other prominent stressors, 
road mortality and persecution and collection, due to a lack of 
specific information on the magnitude of impacts from these factors. 
Additionally, this species is vulnerable to the effects of climate 
change through increasing intensity of winter droughts and increasing 
risk of summer floods, particularly in the southwestern part of its 
range (Pomara et al., undated; Pomara et al. 2014, pp. 95-97). Thus, 
while we acknowledge and considered that disease, road mortality, 
persecution and collection, and climate changes are factors that affect 
the species, and which may increase or exacerbate existing threats in 
the future, our viability assessment does not include a quantitative 
analysis of these stressors.
    The eastern massasauga rattlesnake is State-listed as endangered in 
Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, 
and is listed as endangered in Ontario. In Michigan, the species is 
listed as ``special concern,'' and a Director of Natural Resources 
Order (No. DFI-166.98) prohibits take except by permit.
    Of the 263 sites with extant eastern massasauga populations 
rangewide, 62 percent (164) occur on land (public and private) that is 
considered protected from development; development at the other 38 
percent of sites may result in loss or fragmentation of habitat. Signed 
candidate conservation agreements with assurances (CCAAs) with the 
Service exist for one population in Ohio, one population in Wisconsin, 
and populations on State-owned lands in Michigan. These CCAAs include 
actions to mediate the stressors acting upon the populations and 
provide management prescriptions to perpetuate eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes on these sites. The Wisconsin Department of Natural 
Resources (DNR) developed a CCAA for one population in Wisconsin. 
Through the agreement, existing savanna habitat on State land, 
especially important to gravid (pregnant) females, will be managed to 
maintain and expand open canopy habitat, restore additional savanna 
habitat, and enhance connectivity between habitat areas. In Ohio, a 
CCAA for a State Nature Preserve population addresses threats from 
habitat loss from the prevalence of late-stage successional vegetation, 
the threat of fire both pre- and post-emergence of eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes, and limited connectivity through habitat fragmentation.
    The State of Michigan developed a CCAA that will provide for 
management of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes on State-owned lands. 
This area includes 33 known eastern massasauga occurrences, which 
represents approximately 34 percent of the known extant occurrences 
within the State and

[[Page 67200]]

10 percent rangewide. In addition, other eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
sites on county- or municipally owned land, as well as on privately 
owned land, could be included in the CCAA through Certificates of 
Inclusion issued by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MI 
DNR) prior to the effective date of listing (see DATES, above). The 
CCAA includes management strategies with conservation measures designed 
to benefit the eastern massasauga rattlesnake; these management 
strategies will be implemented on approximately 136,311 acres (55,263 
hectares) of State-owned land. Many of these management actions are 
ongoing, but we do not have site-specific data on these management 
actions to include them in our analysis in the SSA. Nonetheless, we 
determine that the management actions proposed will address some of the 
threats (for example, habitat loss, vegetative succession) impacting 
populations on State lands in Michigan.
    We did not assess the CCAAs under our Policy for Evaluation of 
Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions (PECE policy) (68 FR 
15100; March 28, 2003) because the plans cover only a small part of the 
range of the species, and the conservation measures in the plans will 
not change the overall biological status of the species.
    We have information that at an additional 22 sites (that are not 
covered by a CCAA), habitat restoration or management, or both, is 
occurring; however, we do not have enough information for these sites 
to know if habitat management has mediated the current stressors acting 
upon the populations. The Faust model, however, did include these kinds 
of activities in the projections of trends, and, thus, our future 
condition analyses are based on the assumption that ongoing restoration 
would continue into the future. Lastly, an additional 18 populations 
have conservation plans in place. Although these plans are intended to 
manage for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, sufficient site-specific 
information is not available to assess whether these restoration or 
management activities are currently ameliorating the stressors acting 
upon the population. Thus, we were unable to include the potential 
beneficial impacts into our quantitative analyses.

Species' Projected Future Condition

    To assess the future resiliency, representation, and redundancy of 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, we used the Faust model results to 
predict the number of self-sustaining populations likely to persist 
over the next 10, 25, and 50 years, and extrapolated those proportions 
to the remaining presumed extant populations to forecast the number of 
self-sustaining populations likely to persist at the future time 
scales. We then predicted the change in representation and redundancy. 
The most pertinent results are summarized below. For the full results 
for all time periods, refer to pages 61-76 of the SSA report.
    The projected future resiliency (the number of self-sustaining 
populations) varies across the eastern massasauga rattlesnake's range. 
In the western analysis unit, 83 percent of the modeled populations are 
projected to have a declining trajectory. Furthermore, 94 percent of 
the populations have a low probability of persistence (the probability 
of remaining above the quasi-extirpated threshold of 25 adult females 
is less than 90 percent) by year 25, and, thus, the number of 
forecasted populations likely to be extant declines over time. By year 
50, 18 of the 20 presumed extant populations are projected to be 
extirpated (no individuals remain) or quasi-extirpated, with only 1 
population projected to be self-sustaining. The resiliency of the 
western analysis unit is forecasted to decline over time. The situation 
is similar in the central and eastern analysis units, but to a lesser 
degree. In the central analysis unit, 70 percent of the modeled 
populations are projected to have a declining trajectory and 78 percent 
a low probability of persistence, and thus, by year 50, 180 of the 256 
presumed extant populations are projected to be extirpated or quasi-
extirpated, and 47 populations to be self-sustaining. In the eastern 
analysis unit, 83 percent of the modeled populations are projected to 
have a declining trajectory and 92 percent of the populations are 
projected to have a low probability of persistence, and, thus, by year 
50, 65 of the 71 presumed extant populations are projected to be 
extirpated or quasi-extirpated, and 6 to be self-sustaining. Rangewide, 
54 (16 percent) of the 347 populations that are currently presumed to 
be extant are projected to be self-sustaining by year 50.
    We calculated the future extent of occurrence (representation) for 
the 57 modeled populations (Faust model) and for the populations 
forecasted to persist at years 10, 25, and 50 by using the counties 
occupied by populations to evaluate the proportions of the range 
falling within each analysis unit and the change in spatial 
distribution within each analysis unit. Our results indicate that 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations are likely to persist in all 
three analysis units; however, the distribution of the range is 
predicted to contract northeasterly, and the geographic area occupied 
will decline within each analysis unit over time. The results project 
an 80 percent reduction of the area occupied by the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake rangewide by year 50, with the western analysis unit 
comprising most of the decline (91 percent reduction within the unit). 
These projected declines in extent of occurrence across the species' 
range and within the analysis units suggest that loss of adaptive 
diversity is likely to occur.
    We assessed the ability of eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
populations to withstand catastrophic events (redundancy) by predicting 
the number of self-sustaining populations in each analysis unit and the 
spatial dispersion of those populations relative to future drought 
risk.
    The projected future redundancy (the number and spatial dispersion 
of self-sustaining populations) across the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake's range varies. In the western analysis unit, the risk of 
analysis-unit-wide extirpations from either a D2 or D3 catastrophic 
drought is high, given the low number of populations forecasted to be 
extant. Coupling this with a likely concurrent decline in population 
clusters (reduced spatial dispersion), the risk of analysis-unit-wide 
extirpation is likely even higher. Thus, the level of redundancy in the 
western analysis unit is projected to decline into the future.
    Conversely, in the eastern analysis unit, there is little to no 
risk of a D2- or D3-level drought, and consequently the probability of 
unit-wide extirpation due to a catastrophic drought is very low. Thus, 
redundancy, from a catastrophic drought perspective, is not expected to 
decline over time in the eastern analysis unit.
    Similarly, in the central analysis unit, there is little to no risk 
of a D3 catastrophic drought. The southern and northern portions of the 
central analysis unit, however, are at risk of a D2-level catastrophic 
drought. Losses of populations in these areas may lead to portions of 
the central analysis unit being extirpated and will also increase the 
probability of analysis-unit-wide extirpation. However, the risk of 
analysis-unit-wide extirpation will likely remain low given the 
presumed persistence of multiple populations scattered throughout low 
drought risk areas. Thus, from a drought perspective, the level of 
redundancy is not likely to be noticeably reduced in the central 
analysis unit (see Figure 4.3 (p. 60) in

[[Page 67201]]

the SSA report for a detailed map). A caveat to this conclusion, 
however, is that the forecasted decline in extent of occurrence 
suggests our data are too coarse to tease out whether the forecasted 
decline in populations will lead to substantial losses in spatial 
distribution, and, thus, the risk of analysis-unit-wide extirpation 
might be higher than predicted. Therefore, the future trend in the 
level of redundancy in the central analysis unit is less clear than for 
either the western analysis unit or the eastern analysis unit.
    Given the loss of populations to date, portions of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake's range are in imminent risk of extirpation in 
the near term. Specifically, our analysis suggests there is a high risk 
of extirpation of the western analysis unit and of southern portions of 
the central and eastern analysis units within 10 to 25 years. Although 
self-sustaining populations are expected to persist, loss of other 
populations within the central and eastern analysis units are expected 
to continue as well, and, thus, those populations are at risk of 
extirpation in the future. These losses have led to reductions in 
resiliency and redundancy across the range and may lead to 
irreplaceable loss of adaptive diversity across the range of the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake, thereby leaving the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake less able to adapt to a changing environment into the 
future. Thus, the viability of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake has 
declined and is projected to continue to decline over the next 50 
years.
    The reader is directed to the SSA report for a more detailed 
discussion of our evaluation of the biological status of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake and the influences that may affect its continued 
existence. Our conclusions are based upon the best available scientific 
and commercial data.

Summary of Changes From the Proposed Rule

    In preparing this final rule, we reviewed and fully considered 
comments from the public and peer reviewers on the proposed rule. This 
final rule incorporates minor changes to our proposed listing based on 
the comments we received, as discussed below in Summary of Comments and 
Recommendations, and newly available scientific data. The SSA report 
was updated based on additional data provided, primarily by State fish 
and wildlife agencies. These data allowed us to refine site-specific 
information and improve our understanding of status for several 
populations. Thus, the final numerical results in the second version of 
the SSA report are slightly different from those in the first version 
that was used for the proposed rule. None of the new information we 
received changed our determination in this final rule that the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake is a threatened species.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    In the proposed rule published on September 30, 2015 (80 FR 58688), 
we requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the 
proposal by November 30, 2015. We also contacted appropriate Federal 
and State agencies, scientific experts and organizations, and other 
interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposal. 
Newspaper notices inviting general public comment were published in USA 
Today. We did not receive any requests for a public hearing. All 
substantive information provided during the comment period has either 
been incorporated directly into this final determination or is 
addressed below.

Peer Reviewer Comments

    In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994 
(59 FR 34270), we solicited review of the SSA report from 32 
knowledgeable individuals with scientific expertise that included 
familiarity with eastern massasauga rattlesnake and its habitat, 
biological needs, and threats. We received responses from 21 of the 
peer reviewers.
    We reviewed all comments we received from the peer reviewers for 
substantive issues and new information regarding the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake. Peer reviewer comments are addressed in an appendix to the 
SSA report, and in the SSA itself, as appropriate.

Federal Agency Comments

    (1) Comment: The U.S. Forest Service (Huron-Manistee National 
Forest) stated that there is a need to differentiate between upland and 
lowland habitat in regard to seasonal restrictions on prescribed 
burning within management units of the Huron-Manistee National Forest 
where eastern massasauga rattlesnakes occur. The Forest Service cited a 
conservation plan (Kingsbury 2002) that stated that upon emerging from 
hibernation, most eastern massasauga rattlesnakes are lethargic and 
constrained by cool temperatures, and so remain in the vicinity of 
their wetland burrows through mid-May. They also recommended that the 
Service provide a framework for allowing prescribed fire in upland 
habitats until May 15 in ways that do not violate section 9 of the Act.
    Our Response: We agree that the best available information suggests 
that, upon emerging from hibernation, most eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes do remain lethargic, and stay in the vicinity of their 
burrows (usually located in wetlands) for up to several weeks, and 
during that time they are especially vulnerable to risks from 
predation, prescribed fire, or other sources of mortality. Prior to 
emergence from hibernation, when eastern massasauga rattlesnakes still 
have some protection in the confines of the burrows in which they 
hibernate, they are relatively protected from sources of mortality that 
would take place on the surface. Thus, risk of mortality caused by 
prescribed fire is greatest when snakes are above ground (Durbian 2006, 
pp. 329-330; Cross et al. 2015, pp. 346-347). Many populations of 
eastern massasauga rattlesnakes are small, and in such populations, 
loss of only a few individuals can have significant impacts (Seigel and 
Sheil 1999, p. 20), and prescribed fire was one of the most prominent 
stressors we identified in the SSA for the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake.
    Unfortunately, within the range of this species, unpredictable late 
winter or spring weather patterns, and resulting ground conditions 
(such as humidity, snow cover, prevailing winds), provide a number of 
constraints to land managers who need to implement prescribed fires to 
maintain habitats. Thus, we are also aware that a challenge to managing 
occupied eastern massasauga habitat with prescribed fire is determining 
the best time to apply fire without risking mortality. At most of the 
known sites within the range of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake that 
were included in our analysis, populations are small and vulnerable to 
additive mortality (any mortality beyond that which would be expected 
from predation or other natural factors), as could occur from poorly 
timed prescribed fire. While land managers often request ``cutoff'' 
dates before which burns can be assumed to be safe, natural variation 
in weather cycles can affect the dates when snakes emerge from 
hibernation, with fluctuations of 1 to 3 weeks not being uncommon. In 
addition to the conservation plan (Kingsbury 2002, entire) provided by 
the Forest Service, and that was also reviewed in our SSA, we discussed 
emergence biology of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes at the latitude of 
the Huron-Manistee National Forest with Dr. Bruce Kingsbury (2016, 
pers. comm.). Kingsbury shared additional

[[Page 67202]]

observations of emerging eastern massasauga rattlesnakes in northern 
Michigan since his 2002 conservation plan; he added that his 
observations since 2002 now indicate that many eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes that emerge from hibernation in central and northern 
Michigan in April begin to disperse into adjacent habitats as early as 
May 1. Because of this, Kingsbury cautioned against reliance on a firm 
calendar date as a rule by which to plan prescribed fires if 
unintentional mortality is to be avoided. Instead, he urged land 
managers to use predictive models to help forecast when eastern 
massasauga rattlesnakes are most likely to emerge from hibernacula in a 
given region and year. We thus cannot provide the framework requested 
by the Forest Service to conclude that use of prescribed fire before 
May 15 will never result in ``take'' of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake.
    Because the issue of using prescribed fire as a tool for 
maintaining suitable habitat for eastern massasauga rattlesnakes is so 
important, but also understandably controversial (due to the potential 
for additive mortality), the Service funded a study (from 2010 through 
2015) of rangewide phenology (relation between climate and periodic 
biological phenomena) of the species to better understand the factors 
influencing ingress and egress from hibernation. Preliminary results of 
that study indicate that emergence of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes 
from hibernation at sites throughout the range is predictable based on 
rising subsurface soil temperatures (King 2016, pers. comm.). In 
addition, regional weather stations maintained by the National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) monitor soil temperatures at the 
strata crucial for predicting emergence. Near real-time data generated 
at these weather stations also are accessible to the public, and when 
stations are located near extant populations of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake, these could be used by land managers to determine whether 
emergence from hibernation is near, and thus whether burns should be 
avoided for the remainder of the active season. As further analyses are 
completed and the results of the study are made available, we will work 
cooperatively with interested land managers to incorporate the results 
into useful burn plans. Federal land management agencies, such as the 
Forest Service, that use prescribed fire to manage habitats occupied by 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake should consult with the Service as 
provided by section 7(a)(2) of the Act. In addition, private and State 
land managers can work with the Service to develop plans and determine 
if permits are appropriate to conduct recovery efforts.

Comments From States

    (2) Comment: A State fish and wildlife management agency 
(Pennsylvania Boat and Fish Commission (PBFC)), a State advisory group 
(Pennsylvania Biological Survey), and a private individual stated that 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake has experienced a large range 
reduction in Pennsylvania, and current surveys confirm that extant 
populations remain at only three sites in the State. They further 
commented that the remaining populations are isolated from one another 
and subject to continued threats of habitat alteration, persecution, 
and illegal collecting.
    Our Response: We thank the commenters for the detailed information. 
These data corroborate our analysis. We considered the continued 
decline of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake in Pennsylvania, as well 
as other States in the range of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, in 
the SSA, and agree that the best available information indicates that 
this species is declining in Pennsylvania. Based on the status 
information throughout the species' range and continuing threats to the 
species, we determined that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is 
likely to become in danger of extinction throughout its range within 
the foreseeable future, and thus are listing it as a threatened 
species.
    (3) Comment: A State fish and wildlife management agency (PBFC), a 
State advisory group (Pennsylvania Biological Survey), and several 
private individuals commented that listing would benefit the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake by encouraging recovery planning, surveys, 
outreach and education to the public, and other rangewide conservation 
efforts.
    Our Response: After listing the species, the Service will continue 
to work closely with State conservation agencies, nongovernmental 
organizations (NGOs), and other willing partners throughout the range 
of the species to determine practical and comprehensive actions and 
outreach to conserve and recover the eastern massasauga rattlesnake.
    (4) Comment: Two State fish and wildlife management agencies (PBFC 
and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WI DNR)) commented that 
the Service incorporated data and comments provided by herpetologists 
from the commenter's staff on the SSA, and that the SSA represents the 
best available information on the eastern massasauga rattlesnake in 
their State.
    Our Response: We thank the staffs of PBFC and WI DNR, as well as 
other State and county conservation agencies and NGOs, for assisting us 
in compiling the best available information on the current distribution 
and status of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake throughout its range 
and for providing review of the SSA report.
    (5) Comment: A State fish and wildlife management agency (PBFC) and 
the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy (an NGO) commented that an Eastern 
Massasauga Species Action Plan for Pennsylvania was compiled in 2011, 
to prioritize and guide research and conservation actions at the 
State's extant and presumed extant sites, and noted recent conservation 
and management actions under that plan. A copy of the plan was 
provided.
    Our Response: We thank the commenters for providing a copy of the 
plan, and we incorporated actions outlined in the plan into our revised 
SSA report. When the species is listed (see DATES, above), conservation 
and recovery planning will involve multiple stakeholders. In addition, 
relatively new tools (such as spatially explicit habitat models or 
collaborative processes such as Landscape Conservation Design) are 
available to plan recovery actions at landscape scales, and to involve 
multiple stakeholders in the planning process. After listing takes 
effect (see DATES, above), the Service will continue to work closely 
with State conservation agencies, NGOs, and other willing partners to 
determine practical and comprehensive conservation actions for the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake.
    (6) Comment: A State fish and wildlife management agency (PBFC) 
stated that the loss of resiliency and redundancy across the species' 
range within Pennsylvania leaves the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
vulnerable and with little adaptability to future changes in its 
environment. In addition, this commenter stated that, given the small 
part of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake's range that is represented 
in Pennsylvania, the conservation actions undertaken within the State 
at these vulnerable, isolated sites are projected to have little impact 
on the overall persistence of the species without a more comprehensive, 
regional approach.
    Our Response: We agree that loss of redundancy and loss of 
resiliency across the range of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake are 
of concern. As stated in the SSA report for the eastern

[[Page 67203]]

massasauga rattlesnake, we used the genetic haplotypes identified by 
Ray et al. (2013) as geographic analysis units. We found variation in 
resiliency and redundancy within and between the three analysis units 
(western analysis unit, central analysis unit, and eastern analysis 
unit). While resiliency was lowest in the western analysis unit, there 
was notably low resiliency in the central analysis unit and eastern 
analysis unit, especially along the southern edges, which includes 
populations in Pennsylvania (in the eastern analysis unit). Following 
listing (see DATES, above), we will continue to work with our partners 
in State agencies as well as with local agencies, NGOs, and other 
interested parties to implement conservation measures for this species. 
We agree that, whenever possible, conservation measures undertaken as 
part of comprehensive regional plans have more value than actions taken 
on a site-by-site basis. In addition to recovery planning and other 
traditional tools, Landscape Conservation Design (LCD) may be an option 
to help catalyze such regional planning approaches for the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake.
    (7) Comment: A State fish and wildlife management agency (PBFC) 
stated that, because of the species' increasing isolation, habitat 
loss, and population decline, potential changes to the landscape and 
site conditions would have a high risk of adversely affecting 
Pennsylvania's eastern massasauga rattlesnake population.
    Our Response: We agree that most of these factors present risks to 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, and these factors were considered 
in the SSA for the species. One exception was isolation, which was not 
evaluated as a direct stressor. While genetic isolation may operate as 
a stressor, our review of the literature for the SSA provides evidence 
that some high degree of genetic isolation in this species may be 
natural and pre-date European settlement; thus, isolation in and of 
itself is not necessarily a stressor to the species.
    (8) Comment: Several commenters, including a State fish and 
wildlife management agency (WI DNR), provided statements supporting our 
determination that designating critical habitat for the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake is not prudent due to the increased risks to the 
species if site locations are made publicly available.
    Our Response: In the Critical Habitat section of this final rule, 
we have determined that the designation of critical habitat would 
increase the threat to eastern massasauga rattlesnakes from 
persecution, unauthorized collection, and trade; thus, designating 
critical habitat for the species is not prudent. Designation of 
critical habitat requires the publication of detailed maps and a 
specific narrative description of critical habitat in the Federal 
Register, and these in turn often become available through other media. 
We have determined that the publication of maps and descriptions 
outlining the locations of this species would further facilitate 
unauthorized collection and trade, as collectors would know the exact 
locations where eastern massasauga rattlesnakes occur. Due to the 
threat of unauthorized collection and trade, a number of biologists 
working for State and local conservation agencies that manage 
populations of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes also expressed to the 
Service serious concerns with publishing maps and boundary descriptions 
of occupied habitat areas that could be associated with critical 
habitat designation (Redmer 2015, pers. comm.).
    (9) Comment: A State fish and wildlife management agency (WI DNR) 
commented that they will continue to encourage management of known 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake sites to address succession and other 
habitat concerns, and will continue to submit data and work 
collaboratively with the Service on eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
conservation.
    Our Response: We thank WI DNR for their shared interest in 
conservation actions for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, and for 
stating their interest in continuing our partnership for conserving 
this species following listing.
    (10) Comment: WI DNR provided updated data on the status of the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnakes and their conservation actions at two 
specific sites.
    Our Response: We thank WI DNR for their willingness to coordinate, 
for providing relevant data while we were preparing the SSA, and for 
providing additional information in their comments. We have 
incorporated that additional information into our revised SSA report.
    (11) Comment: WI DNR commented that an additional conservation 
measure for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake in Wisconsin includes a 
broad incidental take permit/authorization for management work 
conducted within massasauga habitat (http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/ERReview/ItGrasslands.html).
    Our Response: When the listing becomes effective (see DATES, 
above), any incidental take of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes will be 
prohibited under section 9 of the Act unless permitted under section 
10(a)(1)(B) or section 7(a)(2) of the Act. We will work with WI DNR to 
clarify our respective roles and responsibilities with respect to 
incidental take.
    (12) Comment: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MN 
DNR) confirmed that there are no verified records of eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes from within the State in the past 50 years. They stated 
that because of this lack of recent occurrence, they may request that 
the Service remove Minnesota from the eastern massasauga rattlesnake's 
current range.
    Our Response: During our evaluation of the species, we consulted 
with staff from the MN DNR to assess the best available information on 
the species' occurrence in the State. We thank the commenter for 
providing additional information specific to surveys that led to 
historical populations in Minnesota being considered likely extirpated. 
We will consider a range of recovery actions following listing, and 
will work with local and State partners to determine and implement 
actions that would have the most benefit to the species. We concur that 
the best available information suggests that this species is likely 
extirpated from Minnesota, and thus Minnesota is not considered part of 
the current range. However, the species receives the protections of the 
Act wherever found; thus, if the species does occur in Minnesota in the 
future, it would be protected there.
    (13) Comment: The MI DNR recommended that, to address public safety 
concerns, the Service develop a rule under section 4(d) of the Act (a 
``4(d) rule'') that would allow people to move the snakes from ``high 
risk environments (for example, backyards, state campgrounds, schools) 
to areas with low risk.'' They further commented that such a 4(d) rule 
would reduce persecution of the snakes.
    Our Response: We understand that the MI DNR receives several calls 
each year reporting an eastern massasauga rattlesnake in or near a 
human dwelling and requesting assistance to remove it. A 4(d) rule, 
however, is not necessary to provide for the relocation of snakes from 
areas where people may be at risk of bodily harm. Such an action, if 
done on a good faith belief to protect a person from bodily harm, is 
already provided for under the Act without a 4(d) rule; see 16 U.S.C. 
1540(a)(3) and 1540(b)(3). This provision of the Act applies to all 
listed species.
    We also note that non-harmful actions to encourage eastern 
massasauga rattlesnakes to leave, stay off, or keep out of areas with 
frequent human use,

[[Page 67204]]

including a residence, yard, structure, sidewalk, road, trail, foot 
path, or campground, would not result in take and thus will not be 
prohibited. For example, homeowners may use a broom or pole to move an 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake away from their property. When 
circumstances create an imminent threat to human safety, all forms of 
take of listed species (including harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect) are allowed to safeguard human 
safety. The Act's implementing regulations (50 CFR part 17) include a 
take exemption pursuant to the defense of human life (for threatened 
species, see 50 CFR 17.31, which incorporates provisions set forth at 
50 CFR 17.21(c)(2)): ``any person may take endangered [or threatened] 
wildlife in defense of his own life or the lives of others.'') The 
regulations at 50 CFR 17.21(c)(4) require that any person taking, 
including killing, listed wildlife in defense of human life under this 
exception must notify our headquarters Office of Law Enforcement, at 
the address provided at 50 CFR 2.1(b), in writing, within 5 days. In 
addition, section 11 of the Act enumerates the penalties and 
enforcement of the Act. In regard to civil penalties, section 11(a)(3) 
of the Act states, ``Notwithstanding any other provision of this [Act], 
no civil penalty shall be imposed if it can be shown by a preponderance 
of the evidence that the defendant committed an act based on a good 
faith belief that he was acting to protect himself or herself, a member 
of his or her family, or any other individual from bodily harm, from 
any endangered or threatened species'' (16 U.S.C. 1540(a)(3)). Section 
11(b)(3) of the Act contains similar language in regard to criminal 
violations (see 16 U.S.C. 1540(b)(3)).
    Eastern massasauga rattlesnakes generally hibernate in wetlands, 
rather than in places occupied by people. However, in areas near 
wetlands or uplands with natural habitat, eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes occasionally find their way into areas of high human use 
(for example, human-made structures, backyards, or campgrounds). If an 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake is encountered, it is best to not 
disturb it and to walk away from it. However, in areas of high human 
use, other responses may be necessary to protect people from bodily 
harm. Eastern massasauga rattlesnakes observed in areas of human use 
may subsequently conceal themselves as a natural defense mechanism and 
then later be unexpectedly encountered at close range, presenting the 
possibility of bodily harm. Short-distance translocation (moving from 
one location to another) of venomous snakes is a common method used to 
reduce or mitigate snake-human conflicts. In one recent study, eastern 
massasauga rattlesnakes relocated 200 meters (656 feet) from the 
capture point did not exhibit abnormal movement or basking behavior and 
did not return to the capture site (Harvey et al. 2014). Because the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake is a venomous species, we advise due 
caution and encourage anyone wishing to move a snake to contact an 
appropriate State or local agency for professional expertise in 
handling rattlesnakes. In addition, the State or local landowner may 
have other legal requirements that apply to handling wildlife. 
Therefore, when on public lands, we encourage contacting the land 
manager to address the situation whenever feasible. However, anyone may 
take necessary action at any time to protect one's self or another 
person from bodily harm.
    (14) Comment: MI DNR provided a Michigan Natural Features Inventory 
(MNFI) report with the most current eastern massasauga rattlesnake data 
for the State.
    Our Response: We thank MI DNR and MNFI for compiling and providing 
this additional information. MNFI is the organization responsible for 
maintaining the Michigan Natural Heritage Database, which includes 
known historical records for species of concern, including the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake, in Michigan. The database includes records for 
populations of extirpated, likely extirpated, unknown, and extant 
status. During preparation of the SSA report, the Service worked 
closely with MNFI to ensure that the most current, available 
information from the Michigan Natural Heritage Database on the status 
of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake in Michigan was included in our 
analyses. This included new records that the MNFI provided to us as 
late as September 2015, after we had developed the proposed listing 
rule. The report compiled by MNFI was added to our records and used to 
further document our decision.
    (15) Comment: MI DNR noted, as was mentioned in the SSA report, 
that they are in the final stages of completing a CCAA for the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake on MI DNR lands. They requested that the Service 
consider how Michigan's CCAA will address threats to the eastern 
massasauga on MI DNR lands in the final listing determination.
    Our Response: A CCAA is a formal agreement between the Service and 
one or more parties to address the conservation needs of proposed or 
candidate species, or species likely to become candidates, before they 
become listed as endangered or threatened. Landowners voluntarily 
commit to conservation actions that will help stabilize or restore the 
species with the goal that if all other necessary landowners did the 
same, listing would become unnecessary. These agreements encourage 
conservation actions for species that are candidates for listing or are 
likely to become candidates. Although a single property owner's 
activities may not eliminate the need to list, conservation, if 
conducted by enough property owners throughout the species' range, can 
eliminate the need to list. The agreements provide landowners with 
assurances that their conservation efforts will not result in future 
regulatory obligations in excess of those they agree to at the time 
they enter into the agreement.
    After publication of the proposed rule to list the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake as a threatened species, the State of Michigan 
submitted to the Service a CCAA that would provide for management of 
eastern massasauga rattlesnakes on State-owned lands. The term of the 
CCAA and permit is 25 years. The CCAA includes management strategies 
with conservation measures designed to benefit eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes; these management strategies will be implemented on 
approximately 136,311 acres (55,263 hectares) of State-owned land.
    Management strategies beneficial to eastern massasauga rattlesnakes 
are currently being implemented on many sites on State-owned lands in 
Michigan, and are ongoing. The CCAA describes a program of continuing 
existing management strategies beneficial to eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes and reflects the current conditions analyzed in the SSA. 
Existing conservation on State-owned lands in Michigan was accounted 
for in the SSA; the CCAA does not provide detailed site-specific 
information to alter that analysis. Thus, the CCAA does not alter the 
SSA results or projected population trends. While the actions in the 
CCAA are expected to address some of the stressors on many sites on 
State-owned lands in Michigan, the CCAA only covers a small part of the 
species' range; therefore, the conservation measures did not affect the 
overall biological status of the species.
    (16) Comment: MI DNR questioned the Service's use of three analysis 
units to assess the species' current conditions in the SSA, and how use 
of those three units will affect recovery planning and, ultimately, 
delisting. MI DNR expressed their opinion that recovery planning be

[[Page 67205]]

based on the species' range and not the three analysis units.
    Our Response: We identified and delineated the analysis units to 
assess the historical, current, and future representation of the 
species. Representation is an indicator of the ability of the species 
to respond to physical (for example, habitat, climate) and biological 
(for example, new diseases, predators, competitors) changes in its 
environment. The intent of the analysis units is to capture the breadth 
of adaptive diversity (genotypic (genetic makeup) and phenotypic 
(physical traits) diversity of the species). We evaluated available 
genetic and ecological information to identify areas of unique or 
differing genotypic and phenotypic diversity. We did not find any 
compelling ecological differences, but did find strong evidence of 
genetic variation across the range. Data indicate that the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake shows high levels of genetic variation 
(populations can be genetically distinguished from each other) at 
regional and local scales. The synthesis of this genetic data supports 
delineating, on the basis of genetic differentiation, the three broad 
regions identified by Ray et al. (2013, entire). Although several 
studies showed detectable genetic differences among populations within 
these three broad areas, we did not have sufficient information to 
delineate smaller-scale units. Thus, we assessed the distribution among 
and within these three geographic units to evaluate changes in eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake representation from historical condition to the 
present and future. These analysis units were identified for purposes 
of evaluating representation in the SSA, and are not, at this point, 
intended to represent recovery units as might be identified during 
recovery planning. Any future recovery planning effort will use the 
best available information to promote the conservation and survival of 
the species.
    (17) Comment: The New York Department of Environmental Conservation 
(NYDEC) commented that the species is listed as State endangered in New 
York, and that due to the limited range and vulnerability of 
populations, the State does not anticipate delisting the species at any 
point in the future.
    Our Response: We considered the current status of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake in New York, as well as other States in the 
range of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, in the SSA. We agree that 
the best available information indicates that only two populations of 
this species occur in New York State, and thus its conservation status 
is of concern there.
    (18) Comment: NYDEC stated that the two populations in the State 
occur on lands under conservation protection: One is owned by a private 
conservation organization, and the other is a State Wildlife Management 
Area. NYDEC further commented that it has been successful at managing 
for eastern massasauga rattlesnakes at the State-owned site, and 
believes that under continued management, the species will continue to 
thrive at that site. Thus, NYDEC encourages the Service to endorse 
active habitat management practices that promote habitat for the 
species.
    Our Response: The efforts of States and other partners to benefit 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake are important, and we agree that 
habitat management activities to maintain appropriate vegetative 
structure for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake are crucial to its 
continued survival. However, certain management activities (for 
example, prescribed fire) are also known to be important stressors to 
the species, especially where population sizes are small or when timing 
of the management action increases risk (for example, just after snakes 
emerge from hibernation). We will continue to work closely with our 
partners in State and local agencies, NGOs, and any other parties 
interested in conserving this species to investigate best management 
practices and the tradeoffs between management and potential mortality 
to the rattlesnakes.
    (19) Comment: NYDEC requested that the Service include a 4(d) rule 
to exempt some habitat management practices, such as woody vegetation 
removal, when conducted at a time and scale that makes adverse impacts 
to the eastern massasauga rattlesnake unlikely.
    Our Response: We agree that active habitat management for the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake will be crucial to long-term maintenance 
and recovery of existing populations. However, we believe issuance of a 
4(d) rule would not be required to allow such management activities for 
two reasons. First, management actions may take place on a case-by-case 
basis, and we would like to learn more about how to lessen the risk of 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake mortality while still allowing 
appropriate habitat management to occur. Second, vegetation management 
actions that take place at certain times of the year when the snakes 
are not active (for example, during winter when snakes are hibernating 
underground) would not affect the species and, thus, do not require a 
4(d) rule. The Act allows flexibility for us to consider a range of 
recovery actions following listing, and we will work with local and 
State partners to determine and implement actions that have the most 
benefit to the species.

Public Comments

    (20) Comment: An NGO (the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy (WPC)) 
commented that they continue to work closely with PBFC on eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake conservation efforts, including implementation 
of the Eastern Massasauga Species Action Plan. In 2009-2010, habitat 
management plans were developed for eight private landowners in areas 
where eastern massasauga rattlesnakes are known to occur. WPC has 
implemented some of the management plans with the help of PBFC, the 
Pennsylvania Wildlife Commission, and the Pennsylvania Department of 
Conservation and Natural Resources, including habitat restoration 
activities funded by small foundation grants over the past 5 years.
    Our Response: Following listing (see DATES, above), we will 
continue to work with our partners in State agencies as well as with 
local agencies, NGOs, and other interested parties to implement 
conservation measures for this species. Existing efforts to conserve 
the species or local planning documents, like those mentioned by the 
commenter, will be valuable in developing regional or rangewide 
recovery efforts.
    (21) Comment: One commenter stated that it is difficult to achieve 
on-the-ground conservation and restoration for the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake and that land protection efforts are slow and opportunities 
are limited.
    Our Response: Limited resources are often a challenge in 
conservation. Following listing (see DATES, above), we will continue to 
explore opportunities to partner with State and local conservation 
agencies, NGOs, and other interested parties to leverage resources and 
find cooperative solutions to such challenges for the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake.
    (22) Comment: One commenter stated that not all factors that may 
contribute to the decline of the species were fully explored in the 
SSA. In particular, the commenter noted that, while the proposed rule 
acknowledged climate change as a factor exacerbating the threats to 
this species, it did not provide a quantitative analysis of the impacts 
nor fully account for such uncertainty.
    Our Response: A recently published climate change vulnerability 
analysis for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake (Pomara et al. 2015, 
entire) suggests that populations in the southwestern parts of

[[Page 67206]]

the species' range are extremely vulnerable to climate change through 
increasing intensity of winter drought and increasing risks of summer 
floods. Populations in the eastern and central parts of the species' 
range are vulnerable to climate variables, but to a lesser extent than 
the southwestern populations, and the northeastern populations are 
least vulnerable to climate change.
    We acknowledged in the SSA report that we believe our results 
underestimate the risks associated with climate change, especially in 
Indiana and Michigan. As we move forward with recovery for the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake, we will more fully investigate the effects of 
climate change and work towards buffering vulnerable populations.
    (23) Comment: Several commenters supported listing the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake. The comments included statements such as:
     Resource development (natural gas extraction and open pit 
mining for limestone, coal, and gravel) is a significant threat to the 
species;
     Significant ongoing decline and multiple continuing 
threats throughout the species' range support listing;
     Only small, isolated populations of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake remain, and the species should be protected before further 
losses occur; and
     It is important to preserve biodiversity, so this species 
should be protected.
    Our Response: We thank these commenters for their statements. When 
Congress passed the Act in 1973, it recognized that our rich natural 
heritage is of ``aesthetic, ecological, educational, recreational, and 
scientific value to our Nation and its people.'' It further expressed 
concern that many of our nation's native plants and animals were in 
danger of becoming extinct. The purpose of the Act is to protect and 
recover imperiled species and the ecosystems upon which they depend, 
and thus plays a role in preserving biodiversity.
    (24) Comment: One commenter stated that, as an alternative to 
designating critical habitat, species protection could be improved by 
strengthening environmental review for the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake by providing more information and adding more stringent 
requirements on those conducting permitted activities. This commenter 
recommended close coordination between Federal and State agencies to 
achieve the appropriate level of environmental review and management to 
conserve the species.
    Our Response: Following listing of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake (see DATES, above), regulatory provisions of the Act will 
take effect. For example, the actions of Federal agencies that may 
affect the species will be subject to consultation with the Service as 
required under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. In doing so, the Service 
works with the action agencies to avoid or minimize adverse effects to 
the species to ensure that the continued existence of the species is 
not jeopardized. Also following listing, we will work closely with our 
partners in Federal, State, and local units of government, as well as 
NGOs and others with an interest in the species, to identify and 
implement proactive measures to conserve and recover the species.
    (25) Comment: Several commenters stated that critical habitat 
should be designated for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. One of 
these commenters added that habitat is ``critical to the species' 
survival'' and habitat loss and degradation is the most significant 
threat to the species, and provided information arguing that although 
human persecution is a threat, and human disturbance of the snakes did 
change the snakes' behavior, no long-term effects were observed. They 
further commented that increased risk of illegal collection or 
persecution could be addressed through education efforts.
    Our Response: We agree that outreach efforts will be important in 
addressing many topics related to conserving the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake. However, we determined that designation of critical 
habitat would increase persecution, unauthorized collection, and trade 
threats to the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. The eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake is highly valued in the pet trade, and that value is likely 
to increase as the species becomes rarer. In addition, as a venomous 
species, it also is the target of persecution. Furthermore, States and 
other land managers have taken measures to control and restrict 
information on the locations of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake and 
to no longer make location and survey information readily available to 
the public. We have, therefore, determined in accordance with 50 CFR 
424.12(a)(1) that it is not prudent to designate critical habitat for 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake (see Critical Habitat, below, for a 
full discussion).
    (26) Comment: One commenter stated that a rattlesnake does not 
contribute meaningfully to its ecosystem; thus, the Service should 
focus on more important and less loathsome species.
    Our Response: While the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is a 
venomous species, and we are aware that this is a reason some people 
may fear it, the species is considered to be among the more shy and 
docile species of North American rattlesnakes. Eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes are known to eat voles, mice, other small mammals, small 
birds, amphibians, and even other species of snakes. Predatory birds 
(such as hawks) and mammals (such as raccoons) are also known to prey 
on eastern massasauga rattlesnakes. Thus, they do have a function 
within ecosystems where they occur. Finally, there are no provisions in 
the Act that allow us to distinguish between species that are popular 
and those that are disliked. We used the best available scientific and 
commercial data to determine that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
warrants listing as a threatened species.
    (27) Comment: One commenter stated that public education will be an 
important component of conservation for the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake.
    Our Response: We thank the commenter and agree with this statement. 
We are aware that, under rare circumstances, bites from a venomous 
snake, such as the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, could present some 
risk to human health and safety. We are also aware that this is a 
reason why some people fear the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. Since 
the species became a candidate for listing in 1999, the Service has 
worked closely with our partners to provide outreach through producing 
or funding print and digital outreach materials, providing staff as 
speakers, and also responding to questions from the media pertaining to 
this species. Following listing (see DATES, above), this need will not 
change, and it is our intent to continue to work with partners to 
ensure that current information on the role played by this species is 
available to the public.
    (28) Comment: The Illinois Farm Bureau expressed concern that 
``certain pesticide use'' was included in the proposed rule as an 
activity that may ``result in a violation of section 9 of the Act.'' 
They stated that the SSA report does not provide supporting evidence 
that pesticides are a stressor. They requested that ``certain pesticide 
use'' be removed from the list of activities that may result in a 
violation of section 9.
    Our Response: Based on this comment, we took a closer look at the 
risk to the species associated with pesticide use and have removed 
``certain pesticide use'' from the list of activities that may result 
in a violation of section 9 of the Act under the

[[Page 67207]]

Available Conservation Measures section of this final rule. We included 
pesticide use in the original list of potential threats due to the 
potential for impacts to populations of burrowing crayfishes upon which 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake relies (by hibernating in the 
burrows of these crayfish); however, this link is not strongly 
substantiated. If additional supporting information is found that 
pesticides may pose a threat to the burrowing crayfishes and the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake, we may again recognize this in the 
future. We note that any determination of whether an activity results 
in prohibited ``take'' of an eastern massasauga rattlesnake is case-
specific and independent of our discussion in the proposed or final 
listing rules.
    (29) Comment: The Illinois Farm Bureau requested that, as an 
important stakeholder, they should be involved in a ``robust 
stakeholder engagement process'' to develop best management practices 
(BMPs) and avoidance measures that protect the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake.
    Our Response: Extant populations of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake are now extremely rare in Illinois (perhaps fewer than six 
populations remaining), and occur primarily on public conservation 
lands. This, in turn, makes encounters with this species in Illinois 
very rare. However, several core areas occupied by the remaining 
Illinois populations are adjacent to private lands that are in 
agricultural use. Because of this, we believe it is important to 
remaining engaged with the Illinois Farm Bureau and potentially 
affected private landowners as stakeholders. We will also work closely 
to follow the lead of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, 
which has a successful track record of working with private land owners 
(including farmers) in areas where eastern massasauga rattlesnakes 
occur to increase awareness of the conservation challenges faced by 
this species.
    (30) Comment: FirstEnergy commented that the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake is of interest to its 10 operating companies, as 
populations occur in their service area. They further commented that 
they use integrated vegetation management (IVM) to maintain grassland 
habitats within and along transmission corridors, thus providing ideal 
habitat for species like the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. They 
claimed that listing the eastern massasauga rattlesnake could have 
significant impacts on their operations in Pennsylvania and Ohio, from 
affecting new transmission line construction to routine transmission 
corridor maintenance, which could affect their ability to provide 
essential services to millions of people. They requested that, because 
maintenance and expansion of transmission corridors is beneficial to 
the conservation of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake (by managing 
succession), the Service consider a 4(d) rule specific to transmission 
corridors.
    Our Response: While a number of populations of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake are considered to be extant in Pennsylvania and 
Ohio, many of those populations occur in scattered locations. While the 
limits of the species' range depicted on the map (see Figure 1, above) 
give the appearance that this species is widespread, many actions that 
would be expected to affect the species where it does occur may, in 
reality, take place in areas where it does not. In cases where 
proximity to a known location is uncertain, the commenter, or similar 
entities, can contact the Service's Ecological Services field offices 
for clarification and to address specific issues related to their 
needs. Also, in cases where an action is regulated or permitted by 
another Federal agency (for example the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (FERC)), consultation with the Service under section 7(a)(2) 
of the Act would also provide opportunities to determine best 
management practices in the event that the action may affect the 
species. There are other provisions of the Act that allow for the 
consideration of such management actions on a case-by-case basis; thus 
issuance of a species-specific 4(d) rule is not appropriate.
    (31) Comment: A county government agency (Forest Preserve District 
of Will County, Illinois) stated that their land holdings include a 
now-extirpated population of eastern massasauga rattlesnake and 
provided supporting information. They also stated that they hoped 
listing would allow additional conservation efforts and possible 
reintroduction into previously occupied lands.
    Our Response: We considered the best available data, including 
historical occurrences and the knowledge of local species experts, in 
conducting our SSA, and we also considered the population in Will 
County, Illinois, to be extirpated. We thank the commenter for 
providing additional information specific to surveys that led to this 
location being considered extirpated. We have incorporated that 
additional information into our revised SSA report. We will consider a 
range of recovery actions following listing and will work with local 
and State partners to determine and implement actions that would have 
the most benefit to the species.
    (32) Comment: An individual reports having seen two eastern 
massasauga rattlesnakes in New Brunswick, Canada, but the commenter did 
not provide any documentation or supporting evidence.
    Our Response: We considered the best available data, including 
historical occurrences and the knowledge of local species experts, in 
this listing determination. Because the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
also occurs in Canada, we coordinated with colleagues from the 
responsible Federal (Parks Canada) and Provincial (Ontario Ministry of 
Resources and Forestry) governments in Canada in compiling records used 
in our SSA. We are aware of no documented records of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake in New Brunswick, and, as such, we do not 
consider this area to be part of the species' historical range. If, 
however, the species is documented from localities outside of the range 
as we currently understand it, we will update our records accordingly.
    (33) Comment: One industry group urged the Service to endorse the 
integrated vegetation management (IVM) BMPs they implement, and 
expressed their strong belief that through close coordination between 
the Service and pipelines and utility companies utilizing IVM BMPs, 
they can help be part of the solution towards restoring populations of 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake.
    Our Response: We thank the commenter for their suggestion and look 
forward to working collaboratively with landowners and managers from 
the public, private, and industry sectors following listing. Also, 
while the eastern massasauga rattlesnake has a broad geographic range, 
in many cases extant populations occur in widely scattered locations. 
Thus, instances where populations actually do occur close to certain 
project areas may actually be fairly limited. In cases where proximity 
to a known location is uncertain, the commenter, or similar entities, 
can contact the Service's Ecological Services field offices for 
clarification and to proactively address specific issues related to 
their needs. Also, in cases where an action is authorized, funded, or 
carried out by another Federal agency (for example, FERC), consultation 
with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act would also provide 
opportunities to determine best management practices in the event that 
the action may affect the species.
    (34) Comment: One commenter stated that fire management is an 
important component of maintaining habitat for

[[Page 67208]]

the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. They further commented that prairie 
species, like the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, are adapted to fire; 
thus, if fire is used appropriately, individuals can easily move to 
safety and very few will be killed.
    Our Response: As stated in our response to Comment 1, above, we 
agree that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is a species that occurs 
primarily within habitats that are dependent on periodic fires to 
maintain appropriate vegetative structure. Suppression of wildfires 
following European settlement has allowed degradation of many such 
plant communities through succession by woody vegetation, and land 
managers often use prescribed fire as a management technique to 
maintain these communities so that woody canopies are not established. 
However, because many of the remaining populations of the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake are already small, and vulnerable to loss of 
individuals (Faust et al. 2011, pp. 59-60; Seigel and Shiel 1999, pp. 
19-20), mortality resulting from prescribed fire was one of the most 
prominent stressors identified by Faust et al. (2011, pp. 12-16) and in 
the SSA. Please refer to our response to Comment 1, above, for more 
details regarding the use of prescribed fire.
    (35) Comment: One commenter recommended that the Service not issue 
any rules that would impinge upon the private property rights of 
individual citizens on non-public lands. They further stated that there 
is no need to set aside specific lands or take private property to 
benefit this species, and that private landowners should only be 
required to participate on a voluntary basis.
    Our Response: The Service works proactively with private landowners 
who want to voluntarily take measures to help conserve listed species 
on their property. We do not take private lands to benefit listed 
species. In cases where we acquire lands (for example, through fee-
simple purchase, or through providing funding to our partners in State 
and local government, or to NGOs) to benefit listed species, it is the 
Service's policy that purchases be made from willing sellers, and that 
fair market price be paid. In cases where private landowners propose 
legal activities or uses of their lands that may lead to incidental 
take of listed species, the Act provides for mechanisms (such as 
habitat conservation plans) that allow interested parties to find 
collaborative ways to minimize and mitigate impacts to the species 
while still allowing them to proceed with their proposed activities. 
Similarly, if proposed land uses require actions (for example issuance 
of Federal permits) by other Federal agencies, section 7(a)(2) of the 
Act allows the action agency to consult with the Service to ensure that 
the action will not jeopardize listed species.
    (36) Comment: One commenter specified that it is imperative to keep 
people safe on public lands. Thus, they recommended that the State 
natural resource agencies have the clear ability to remove snakes from 
areas where there is a high likelihood the snakes will come into 
contact with people. Another commenter stated that the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake poses a risk to livestock and pets in the summer 
months when the snakes are sunning themselves on roads, field edges, 
lawns, and rock piles. A third commenter added that listing the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake will not protect it, as people who feel 
threatened by the snakes will continue to kill them and will not report 
it.
    Our Response: The Act includes provisions to allow flexibility to 
remove individual snakes from situations where they present a risk to 
human health or safety. These provisions include the potential for both 
lethal and nonlethal take, and the situations in which these options 
are permissible are discussed above under our response to Comment 13. 
We also note that non-harmful actions to encourage eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes to leave, stay off, or keep out of areas with frequent 
human use, including a residence, yard, structure, sidewalk, road, 
trail, foot path, or campground, would not result in take and thus are 
not prohibited. For example, maintenance of mowed lawn in areas of 
regular human use to discourage eastern massasauga rattlesnakes from 
entering these areas is acceptable.
    (37) Comment: One commenter stated that Sistrurus catenatus 
populations east of the Mississippi are divided into two genetic units: 
a ``western'' unit consisting of individuals from populations in 
Illinois and Wisconsin and an ``eastern'' unit consisting of all other 
populations. The commenter stated that these populations are weakly 
phylogenetically distinct from each other and historical modeling 
suggests that eastern populations are derived from western populations 
through a post-glacial colonization process. The ``western'' unit is 
roughly comparable to the ``western'' unit proposed by Ray et al. 
(2013, entire), while the ``eastern'' unit is consistent with the 
``central and eastern'' units proposed by Ray et al. (2013, entire). 
The same commenter provided data based on genetic analysis of tissue 
samples from eastern massasauga rattlesnakes from northeast Iowa, 
indicating that snakes in the sampled population are genetically 
distinct from other eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations. Those 
data indicate that snakes in this population are of hybrid origin 
consisting of a mixture of approximately 80 percent genetic markers 
specific to the eastern massasauga rattlesnake and 20 percent genetic 
markers specific to the western massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus 
tergeminus). The commenter further stated that modeling indicates that 
they originated through a historical hybridization event between these 
species within the last 10,000 years, likely as a result of shifting 
species distributions due to post-glacial environmental effects. The 
commenter stated that the conservation status of these northeast Iowa 
populations should be assessed.
    Our Response: We appreciate the information provided on the 
emerging science on genetics and taxonomy of eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes. We hope to continue the close working relationship with 
the commenter as the science advances. The data on genetic haplotypes 
described by Ray et al. (2013, entire) have been peer-reviewed and 
published. Furthermore, these haplotypes are current recognized by the 
American Zoological Association in managing their captive populations. 
Thus, we used the genetic haplotypes of Ray et al. (2013, entire) to 
delineate our analysis units into a western analysis unit, a central 
analysis unit, and an eastern analysis unit. We understand that the 
commenter is also researching this topic and has stated intent to 
publish it in a peer-reviewed journal. The Act requires us to use the 
best available data in decision making, and we hope to continue the 
close working relationship with the commenter as the genetic science on 
the species advances.
    With regard to the detection of possible past hybridization in the 
Iowa population, we thank this commenter for providing new information. 
Since this comment was submitted, we have discussed this topic further 
with the commenter. Because the population in question is comprised 
primarily of genetic markers of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, we 
still consider the northeast Iowa individuals to be eastern massasauga 
rattlesnakes.
    (38) Comment: The Nature Conservancy's Indiana Office provided an 
overview of the status of eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations at 
sites they own in Indiana and that historically supported the species.
    Our Response: We thank the commenter for providing additional

[[Page 67209]]

information on the historical occurrence of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake on their land holdings, and we have added it to information 
gathered from the Natural Heritage Database as provided by the Indiana 
Department of Natural Resources so that it may augment our data on the 
species.
    (39) Comment: One commenter stated that there is no evidence that 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake existed in Missouri, and that 
populations in eastern Missouri should be considered as western 
massasauga rattlesnakes, a different species. The commenter stated that 
populations of the eastern massasauga rattlesnakes occurring east of 
the Mississippi River warrant protection.
    Our Response: In evaluating the taxonomy and distribution of the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake, we considered the best available 
scientific information (see pages 8-9 of the SSA report). While recent 
genetic studies showed that extant populations in central and 
northwestern Missouri belong to the western massasauga rattlesnake 
(Sistrurus tergeminus), no useful tissues from snakes in extreme 
eastern Missouri (St. Louis and Warren Counties) were available to the 
researchers for inclusion in the genetic studies because those 
populations are likely extirpated. This was confirmed during 
coordination between the Service and the responsible State fish and 
wildlife management agency (Missouri Department of Conservation). 
However, published studies on phenotypic variation (especially color 
pattern) of massasauga rattlesnakes from throughout Missouri--including 
the historical, but now likely extirpated populations in extreme 
eastern Missouri--indicate that the latter populations could be 
phenotypically included within the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. 
Recently extirpated, historical populations of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake were known from the adjacent part of Illinois, less than 19 
miles (30 kilometers) from the historical eastern Missouri populations. 
In addition, genetic studies of massasauga rattlesnakes in Iowa 
indicate that the eastern massasauga genotype is present there (though 
these are also of likely past hybridization), well west of the 
Mississippi River. In the absence of better information on the 
taxonomic identity of the likely extirpated massasauga populations in 
extreme eastern Missouri, we have included those populations within the 
historical range of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake.
    (40) Comment: One commenter stated that the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake is more prevalent than MI DNR or the Service estimate and 
that the species is common in northern Michigan.
    Our Response: It is widely recognized that Michigan still harbors a 
greater number of extant populations of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake than any of the other nine States and the one Canadian 
Province where the species occurred historically. We coordinated with 
our partner State fish and wildlife agencies, consulted the most 
current information from Natural Heritage Databases, and solicited 
information from species experts for each State and for Ontario to 
compile the most current data on the species. In addition to these 
scientific sources, we sought out public comment and data through the 
proposed listing rule's public comment period. In Michigan 
specifically, MNFI houses the Natural Heritage Database; they, among 
others, provided input on the Michigan populations. Based on these 
data, historically and currently, Michigan harbors a greater number of 
extant populations than any of the other nine States and Ontario. There 
are 259 known populations of eastern massasauga rattlesnake in 
Michigan; this is 46 percent of all known populations rangewide. Of 
these, 158 (61 percent) are believed to persist today and another 47 
have unknown status; the Michigan populations represent 59 percent of 
all known extant populations rangewide. Thus, compared to other 
localities, the eastern massasauga rattlesnake was historically and 
continues to be more prevalent in Michigan than in any other State. We 
acknowledge that there may still be some undocumented populations 
remaining, especially in Michigan. We recommend that individuals with 
specific knowledge of populations contact MNFI to ensure the locations 
of eastern massasauga rattlesnake are known.
    (41) Comment: Several commenters stated that the species should be 
listed as endangered rather than threatened, but did not provide 
further rationale or new evidence in support of this recommendation.
    Our Response: For reasons discussed in the Determination section of 
this final rule, the Service has determined that the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake meets the Act's definition of a threatened species, rather 
than an endangered species.

Determination

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures for adding 
species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we may list a species based 
on: (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) 
disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its 
continued existence. Listing actions may be warranted based on any of 
the above threat factors, singly or in combination.
    We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial data 
available regarding the past, present, and predicted future condition 
of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake and how threats are affecting the 
species now and into the future. The species faces an array of threats 
that have and will likely continue (often increasingly) to contribute 
to declines at all levels (individual, population, and species). The 
loss of habitat was historically, and continues to be, the threat with 
greatest impact to the species (Factor A), either through development 
or through changes in habitat structure due to vegetative succession. 
Disease, new or increasingly prevalent, is another emerging and 
potentially catastrophic threat to eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
populations (Factor C) that is likely to affect the species in the 
foreseeable future. As population sizes decrease, localized impacts, 
such as collection and persecution of individuals, also increases the 
risk of extinction (Factor B). These stressors are chronic and are 
expected to continue with a similar magnitude of impact into the 
future. Additionally, this species is vulnerable to the effects of 
climate change through increasing intensity of winter droughts and 
increasing risk of summer floods (Factor E), particularly in the 
southwestern part of its range (Pomera et al. undated, unpaginated; 
Pomera et al. 2014, pp. 95-97).
    Some conservation actions (for example, management of invasive 
species and woody plant encroachment, timing prescribed fires to avoid 
the active season) are currently in place, and provide protection and 
enhancement to some eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations (see pp. 
43-45 in the SSA report for a full discussion). However, our analysis 
projects that eastern massasauga rattlesnake populations will continue 
to decline even if current conservation measures are continued into the 
future. As a result of these factors, the number and health of eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake populations are anticipated to decline across 
the species' range,

[[Page 67210]]

particularly in the southwestern portions of the range, where large 
losses relative to historical conditions have already occurred.
    Further, the reductions in eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
population numbers, distribution, and health forecast in the SSA report 
likely represent an overly optimistic scenario for the species, and 
future outcomes may be worse than predicted. Because of the type of 
information available to us, the quantitative analysis assumes that 
threat magnitude and pervasiveness remain constant into the future, but 
it is more likely that the magnitude of threats will increase into the 
future throughout the range of the species (for example, the frequency 
of drought and flooding events are likely to increase) or that novel 
threats (for example, new pathogens) may arise. In addition, some 
currently identified threats are not included in the quantitative 
analysis (for example, disease, road mortality, persecution/collection, 
and impacts from climate change), because we lack specific, 
quantitative information on how these factors may affect the species in 
the future. These factors and their potential effects on the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake were discussed and considered qualitatively as 
part of the determination.
    The species' viability is also affected by losses of populations 
from historical portions of its range, which may have represented 
unique genetic and ecological diversity. The species is extirpated from 
Minnesota and Missouri, and many populations have been lost in the 
western part of the species' range. Rangewide, the extent of occurrence 
is predicted to decline by 80 percent by year 50. Actual losses in 
extent of occurrence will likely be greater than estimated because of 
the methodology used in our analysis, as discussed above.
    The Act defines an endangered species as any species that is ``in 
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range'' and a threatened species as any species that is ``likely to 
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout 
all or a significant portion of its range.'' A key statutory difference 
between an endangered species and a threatened species is the timing of 
when a species may be in danger of extinction, either now (endangered 
species) or in the foreseeable future (threatened species). Based on 
the biology of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake and the degree of 
uncertainty of future predictions, we find that the ``foreseeable 
future'' for the species is best defined as 50 years. Forecasting to 50 
years, the current threats are still reliably foreseeable at the end of 
that time span based on models, available information on threats 
impacting the species, and other analyses; however, we cannot 
reasonably predict future conditions for the species beyond 50 years. 
Our uncertainty in forecasting the status of the species beyond 50 
years is also increased by our methodology of extrapolating from a 
subset of modeled populations to all extant or potentially extant 
populations.
    We find that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is likely to become 
endangered throughout its entire range within the foreseeable future 
based on the severity and pervasiveness of threats currently impacting 
the species, the projected loss of populations rangewide (loss of 
resiliency and redundancy), and the projected loss of its distribution 
within large portions of its range. This loss in distribution could 
represent a loss of genetic and ecological adaptive diversity, as well 
as a loss of populations from parts of the range that may provide 
future refugia in a changing climate. Furthermore, many of the 
currently extant populations are experiencing high magnitude threats. 
Although these high magnitude threats are not currently pervasive 
rangewide, they are likely to become pervasive in the foreseeable 
future as they expand and impact additional populations throughout the 
species' range. Therefore, on the basis of the best available 
scientific and commercial data, we determine that the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake is likely to become an endangered species within 
the foreseeable future throughout all of its range, and, thus, we are 
listing it as a threatened species in accordance with sections 3(20) 
and 4(a)(1) of the Act.
    We find that an endangered species status is not appropriate for 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. In assessing whether the species is 
in danger of extinction, we used the plain language understanding of 
this phrase as meaning ``presently in danger of extinction.'' We 
considered whether extinction is a plausible condition as the result of 
the established, present condition of the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake. Based on the species' present condition, we find that the 
species is not currently in danger of extinction. The timeframe for 
conditions that render the species to be in danger of extinction is 
beyond the present. While the magnitude of threats affecting 
populations is high, threats are not acting at all sites at a 
sufficient magnitude to result in the species presently being in danger 
of extinction. Additionally, some robust populations still exist, and 
we anticipate they will remain self-sustaining.
    The SSA results likely represent an overly optimistic scenario for 
this species (see pp. 87-88 of the SSA report for a list of assumptions 
and their expected effect). For example, the analysis treated 
populations of unknown status as if they were all extant, likely 
resulting in an overestimate of species' viability. Thus, we considered 
whether treating the populations with an ``unknown'' status as 
currently extant in the analysis had an effect on the status 
determination. We examined whether the number of self-sustaining 
populations would change significantly over time if we instead assumed 
that all populations with an ``unknown'' status were extirpated. The 
results are a more severe projected decline in the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake's status than our analysis projects when we assign the 
unknown status populations to the ``extant'' category, but not to the 
extent that we would determine the species to be currently in danger of 
extinction.
    Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may 
warrant listing if it is in danger of extinction or is likely to become 
so throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Because we 
have determined that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is likely to 
become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout 
all of its range, no portion of its range can be ``significant'' for 
purposes of the definitions of ``endangered species'' and ``threatened 
species.'' See the Final Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase 
``Significant Portion of Its Range'' in the Endangered Species Act's 
Definitions of ``Endangered Species'' and ``Threatened Species'' (79 FR 
37578; July 1, 2014).

Critical Habitat

Background

    Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
    (1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the 
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which 
are found those physical or biological features:
    (a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
    (b) Which may require special management considerations or 
protection; and
    (2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas 
are essential for the conservation of the species.

[[Page 67211]]

    Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define the geographical area 
occupied by the species as: An area that may generally be delineated 
around species' occurrences, as determined by the Secretary (i.e., 
range). Such areas may include those areas used throughout all or part 
of the species' life cycle, even if not used on a regular basis (for 
example, migratory corridors, seasonal habitats, and habitats used 
periodically, but not solely by vagrant individuals).
    Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use, 
and the use of, all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring 
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures 
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and 
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated 
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law 
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live 
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where 
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise 
relieved, may include regulated taking.
    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the requirement that Federal agencies ensure, in consultation 
with the Service, that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is 
not likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of 
critical habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect 
land ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or 
other conservation area. Critical habitat designation does not allow 
the government or public to access private lands, nor does it require 
implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by 
non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner requests Federal agency 
funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed species 
or critical habitat, the Federal agency would be required to consult 
with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the Act, but even if 
consultation leads to a finding that the action would likely cause 
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, the resulting 
obligation of the Federal action agency and the landowner is not to 
restore or recover the species, but rather to implement reasonable and 
prudent alternatives to avoid destruction or adverse modification of 
critical habitat.
    Under the first prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, 
areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time 
it was listed are included in a critical habitat designation if they 
contain physical or biological features (1) which are essential to the 
conservation of the species and (2) which may require special 
management considerations or protection. For these areas, critical 
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best 
scientific and commercial data available, those physical or biological 
features that are essential to the conservation of the species (such as 
space, food, cover, and protected habitat). In identifying those 
physical or biological features, we focus on the specific features that 
support the life-history needs of the species, including but not 
limited to, water characteristics, soil type, geological features, 
prey, vegetation, symbiotic species, or other features. A feature may 
be a single habitat characteristic, or a more complex combination of 
habitat characteristics. Features may include habitat characteristics 
that support ephemeral or dynamic habitat conditions. Features may also 
be expressed in terms relating to principles of conservation biology, 
such as patch size, distribution distances, and connectivity.
    Under the second prong of the Act's definition of critical habitat, 
we can designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical 
area occupied by the species at the time it is listed if we determine 
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species. We 
will determine whether unoccupied areas are essential for the 
conservation of the species by considering the life-history, status, 
and conservation needs of the species. This will be further informed by 
any generalized conservation strategy, criteria, or outline that may 
have been developed for the species to provide a substantive foundation 
for identifying which features and specific areas are essential to the 
conservation of the species and, as a result, the development of the 
critical habitat designation. For example, an area currently occupied 
by the species but that was not occupied at the time of listing may be 
essential to the conservation of the species and may be included in the 
critical habitat designation.
    Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on 
the basis of the best scientific data available. Further, our Policy on 
Information Standards Under the Endangered Species Act (published in 
the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), the Information 
Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)), 
and our associated Information Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, 
establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions 
are based on the best scientific data available. For example, they 
require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and with 
the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and 
original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to 
designate critical habitat.
    When we are determining which areas should be designated as 
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the 
information from the SSA and information developed during the listing 
process for the species. Additional information sources may include any 
generalized conservation strategy, criteria, or outline that may have 
been developed for the species, the recovery plan for the species, 
articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by 
States and counties, scientific status surveys and studies, biological 
assessments, other unpublished materials, or experts' opinions or 
personal knowledge.
    Habitat is dynamic, and species may move from one area to another 
over time. We recognize that critical habitat designated at a 
particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas that 
we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the species. 
For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not signal that 
habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may not be needed 
for recovery of the species. Areas that are important to the 
conservation of the species, both inside and outside the critical 
habitat designation, will continue to be subject to: (1) Conservation 
actions implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) regulatory 
protections afforded by the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act 
for Federal agencies to ensure their actions are not likely to 
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened 
species, and (3) section 9 of the Act's prohibitions on taking any 
individual of the species, including taking caused by actions that 
affect habitat. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed 
species outside their designated critical habitat areas may still 
result in jeopardy findings in some cases. These protections and 
conservation tools will continue to contribute to recovery of this 
species. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of 
the best available information at the time of designation will not 
control the direction and substance of future recovery plans,

[[Page 67212]]

habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or other species conservation 
planning efforts if new information available at the time of these 
planning efforts calls for a different outcome.

Prudency Determination

    Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, and implementing 
regulations (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the maximum extent 
prudent and determinable, we designate critical habitat at the time the 
species is determined to be an endangered or threatened species. Our 
regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation of 
critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of the following 
situations exist:
    (1) The species is threatened by taking or other human activity, 
and identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase the 
degree of threat to the species, or
    (2) Such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to 
the species.
    In determining whether a designation would not be beneficial, the 
factors the Service may consider include but are not limited to: 
Whether the present or threatened destruction, modification, or 
curtailment of a species' habitat or range is not a threat to the 
species, or whether any areas meet the definition of ``critical 
habitat.'' In our proposed listing rule, we determined that both of the 
above circumstances applied to the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. 
However, under our updated critical habitat regulations at 50 CFR 
424.12 (81 FR 7414; February 11, 2016), we cannot conclude that 
critical habitat designation would not be beneficial to the species 
because we have found that there are threats to the species' habitat 
(the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of 
its habitat or range (Factor A) is a threat to the species). However, 
we still find that designation of critical habitat is not prudent under 
the first circumstance because we have determined that the eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake is threatened by taking or other human activity 
and that identification of critical habitat can be expected to increase 
the degree of threat to the species.
    Overutilization in the form of poaching and unauthorized collection 
(Factor B) of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake for the pet trade is a 
factor contributing to declines, and remains a threat with significant 
impact to this species, which has high black market value. For example, 
an investigation into reptile trafficking reports documented 35 eastern 
massasauga rattlesnakes (representing nearly one entire wild source 
population) collected in Canada and smuggled into the United States, 
most destined for the pet trade (Thomas 2010, unpaginated). Snakes in 
general are known to be feared and persecuted by people, and venomous 
species even more so (Ohman and Mineka 2003, p. 7; Whitaker and Shine 
2000, p. 121). As a venomous snake, the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
is no exception, with examples of roundups or bounties for them 
persisting through the mid-1900s (Bushey 1985, p. 10; Vogt 1981; 
Wheeling, IL, Historical Society Web site accessed 2015), and more 
recent examples of persecution in Pennsylvania (Jellen 2005, p. 11) and 
Michigan (Baily et al. 2011, p. 171). The process of designating 
critical habitat would increase human threats to the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake by increasing the vulnerability of this species to 
unauthorized collection and trade, or to persecution, through public 
disclosure of its locations. Designation of critical habitat requires 
the publication of maps and a specific narrative description of 
critical habitat in the Federal Register. The degree of detail in those 
maps and boundary descriptions is far greater than the general location 
descriptions provided in this final rule to list the species as a 
threatened species. Furthermore, a critical habitat designation 
normally results in the news media publishing articles in local 
newspapers and special interest Web sites, usually with maps of the 
critical habitat. We have determined that the publication of maps and 
descriptions outlining the locations of this species would further 
facilitate unauthorized collection and trade, as collectors would know 
the exact locations where eastern massasauga rattlesnakes occur. While 
eastern massasauga rattlesnakes are cryptic in coloration, they can 
still be collected in high numbers during certain parts of their active 
seasons (for example, spring egress from hibernation or summer 
gestation). Also, individuals of this species are often slow-moving and 
have small home ranges. Therefore, publishing specific location 
information would provide a high level of assurance that any person 
going to a specific location would be able to successfully locate and 
collect specimens, given the species' site fidelity and ease of capture 
once located. Due to the threat of unauthorized collection and trade, a 
number of biologists working for State and local conservation agencies 
that manage populations of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes have 
expressed to the Service serious concerns with publishing maps and 
boundary descriptions of occupied habitat areas that could be 
associated with critical habitat designation (Redmer 2015, pers. 
comm.). Designating critical habitat could negate the efforts of State 
and local conservation agencies to restrict access to location 
information that could significantly affect future efforts to control 
the threat of unauthorized collection and trade and persecution of 
eastern massasauga rattlesnakes.
Summary of Prudency Determination
    We have determined that designating critical habitat for the 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake is not prudent. Designation of critical 
habitat would increase the threats to the eastern massasauga 
rattlesnake from persecution and unauthorized collection and trade. A 
limited number of U.S. species listed under the Act have commercial 
value in trade. The eastern massasauga rattlesnake is one of them. Due 
to the market demand and willingness of individuals to collect eastern 
massasauga rattlesnakes without authorization, and the willingness of 
others to kill them out of fear or wanton dislike, we have determined 
that any action that publicly discloses the location of eastern 
massasauga rattlesnakes (such as critical habitat) puts the species in 
further peril. Many populations of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
are small, and the life history of the species makes it vulnerable to 
additive loss of individuals (for example, loss of reproductive adults 
in numbers that would exceed those caused by predation and other non-
catastrophic natural factors), requiring a focused and comprehensive 
approach to reducing threats. One of the basic measures to protect 
eastern massasauga rattlesnakes from unauthorized collection and trade 
is restricting access to information pertaining to the location of the 
species' populations. Publishing maps and narrative descriptions of 
eastern massasauga rattlesnake critical habitat would significantly 
affect our ability to reduce the threat of persecution, as well as 
unauthorized collection and trade. We have, therefore, determined in 
accordance with 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1) that it is not prudent to designate 
critical habitat for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake.

Available Conservation Measures

    Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or 
threatened species under the Act include recognition, recovery actions, 
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain 
practices. The recognition of a species, through listing, results in 
public awareness, and

[[Page 67213]]

conservation by Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies; private 
organizations; and individuals. The Act encourages cooperation with the 
States and other countries and requires that recovery actions be 
carried out for all listed species. The protection required by Federal 
agencies and the prohibitions against certain activities are discussed, 
in part, below.
    The primary purpose of the Act is the conservation of endangered 
and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The 
ultimate goal of such conservation efforts is the recovery of these 
listed species, so that they no longer need the protective measures of 
the Act. Subsection 4(f) of the Act calls for the Service to develop 
and implement recovery plans for the conservation of endangered and 
threatened species. The recovery planning process involves the 
identification of actions that are necessary to address the threats to 
its survival and recovery. The goal of this process is to restore 
listed species to a point where they are secure, self-sustaining, and 
functioning components of their ecosystems.
    Recovery planning includes the development of a draft and final 
recovery plan. The recovery plan also identifies recovery criteria for 
review of when a species may be ready for downlisting or delisting, and 
methods for monitoring recovery progress. Recovery plans also establish 
a framework for agencies to coordinate their recovery efforts and 
provide estimates of the cost of implementing recovery tasks. When 
completed, the draft recovery plan and the final recovery plan will be 
available on our Web site (http://www.fws.gov/endangered), or from our 
Chicago Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT). Revisions of the plan may be done to address continuing or 
new threats to the species, as new substantive information becomes 
available. Implementation of recovery actions generally requires the 
participation of a broad range of partners, including other Federal 
agencies, States, Tribes, nongovernmental organizations, businesses, 
and private landowners. Examples of recovery actions include habitat 
restoration (for example, restoration of native vegetation) and 
management, research, captive propagation and reintroduction, and 
outreach and education. The recovery of many listed species cannot be 
accomplished solely on Federal lands because their range may occur 
primarily or solely on non-Federal lands. To achieve recovery of these 
species requires cooperative conservation efforts on private, State, 
and Tribal lands.
    Following publication of this final rule, funding for recovery 
actions will be available from a variety of sources, including Federal 
budgets, State programs, and cost share grants for non-Federal 
landowners, the academic community, and nongovernmental organizations. 
In addition, pursuant to section 6 of the Act, the States of Illinois, 
Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, Ohio, 
Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will be eligible for Federal funds to 
implement management actions that promote the protection or recovery of 
the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. Information on our grant programs 
that are available to aid species recovery can be found at: http://www.fws.gov/grants.
    Please let us know if you are interested in participating in 
recovery efforts for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake. Additionally, 
we invite you to submit any new information on this species whenever it 
becomes available and any information you may have for recovery 
planning purposes (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies to evaluate their 
actions with respect to any species that is listed as an endangered or 
threatened species and with respect to its critical habitat, if any is 
designated. Regulations implementing this interagency cooperation 
provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(2) 
of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities they 
authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or destroy 
or adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action may 
affect a listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible 
Federal agency must enter into consultation with the Service.
    Federal agency actions within the species' habitat that may require 
conference or consultation or both as described in the preceding 
paragraph include management and any other landscape-altering 
activities on Federal lands administered by the Service (Upper 
Mississippi National Wildlife and Fish Refuge, Wisconsin), U.S. Forest 
Service (Huron-Manistee National Forest, Michigan), National Park 
Service (Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, Indiana), or military lands 
administered by branches of the Department of Defense (Fort Grayling, 
Michigan); flood control projects (Lake Carlyle, Illinois) and issuance 
of section 404 Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) permits by the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; construction and maintenance of roads or 
highways by the Federal Highway Administration; and construction and 
maintenance of pipelines or rights-of-way for transmission of 
electricity, and other energy related projects permitted or 
administered by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
    Under section 4(d) of the Act, the Service has discretion to issue 
regulations that we find necessary and advisable to provide for the 
conservation of threatened species. The Act and its implementing 
regulations set forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions 
that apply to threatened wildlife. The prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) 
of the Act, as applied to threatened wildlife and codified at 50 CFR 
17.31, make it illegal for any person subject to the jurisdiction of 
the United States to take (including harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or to attempt any of these) 
threatened wildlife within the United States or on the high seas. In 
addition, it is unlawful to import; export; deliver, receive, carry, 
transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of 
commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign 
commerce any listed species. It is also illegal to possess, sell, 
deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been 
taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply to employees of the Service, 
the National Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land management 
agencies, and State conservation agencies.
    We may issue permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities 
involving threatened wildlife under certain circumstances. Regulations 
governing permits are codified at 50 CFR 17.32. With regard to 
threatened wildlife, a permit may be issued for the following purposes: 
For scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the 
species, for economic hardship, for zoological exhibition, for 
educational purposes, and for incidental take in connection with 
otherwise lawful activities. There are also certain statutory 
exemptions from the prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 
of the Act.
    It is our policy, as published in the Federal Register on July 1, 
1994 (59 FR 34272), to identify to the maximum extent practicable at 
the time a species is listed, those activities that would or would not 
constitute a violation of section 9 of the Act. The intent of this 
policy is to increase public awareness of the effect of a final listing 
on proposed and ongoing activities within the range of the listed 
species. Based on the best

[[Page 67214]]

available information, the following activities may potentially result 
in a violation of section 9 of the Act; this list is not comprehensive:
    (1) Development of land or the conversion of native land to 
agricultural land, including the construction of any related 
infrastructure (for example, roads, bridges, railroads, pipelines, 
utilities) in occupied eastern massasauga rattlesnake habitat;
    (2) Certain dam construction: In an area where the dam alters the 
habitat from native land types (for example, grassland, swamp, fen, 
bog, wet prairie, sedge meadow, marshland, peatland, floodplain forest, 
coniferous forest) causing changes in hydrology at hibernacula or where 
the dam causes fragmentation that separates snakes from hibernacula or 
gestational sites;
    (3) Post-emergent prescribed fire: Prescribed burns to control 
vegetation that are conducted after snakes have emerged from their 
hibernacula and are thus exposed to the fire;
    (4) Post-emergent mowing for habitat management: Mowing of 
vegetation after snakes have emerged from hibernacula can cause direct 
mortality by contact with blades or being run over by tires on mower;
    (5) Water level manipulation: Flooding or hydrologic drawdown 
affecting eastern massasauga rattlesnake individuals or habitat, 
particularly hibernacula;
    (6) Certain research activities: Collection and handling of eastern 
massasauga rattlesnake individuals for research that may result in 
displacement or death of the individuals; and
    (7) Poaching, collecting, or persecuting individuals.
    Based on the best available information, the following actions are 
unlikely to result in a violation of section 9 of the Act, if these 
activities are carried out in accordance with existing regulations and 
permit requirements; this list is not comprehensive:
    (1) Pre-emergent fire: Prescribed burns to control vegetation 
occurring prior to eastern massasauga rattlesnake emergence from 
hibernacula (typically in late March to early April); and
    (2) Pre-emergent mowing or other mechanical vegetation removal: 
Mowing or cutting of vegetation prior to eastern massasauga rattlesnake 
emergence from hibernacula.
    Questions regarding whether specific activities would constitute a 
violation of section 9 of the Act should be directed to the Chicago 
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Required Determinations

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

    We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental 
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be 
prepared in connection with listing a species as an endangered or 
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a 
notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal 
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available 
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the 
Chicago Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).

Authors

    The primary authors of this final rule are staff members of the 
Midwest Regional Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 
of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless 
otherwise noted.


0
2. Amend Sec.  17.11(h) by adding an entry for ``Rattlesnake, eastern 
massasauga'' to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in 
alphabetical order under REPTILES to read as follows:


Sec.  17.11   Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      Listing citations and
          Common name            Scientific name    Where listed       Status            applicable rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
           Reptiles
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Rattlesnake, eastern            Sistrurus         Wherever found..  T            [Insert Federal Register
 massasauga.                     catenatus.                                       citation]; 9/30/16.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: September 21, 2016.
Stephen Guertin,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-23538 Filed 9-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4333-15-P



                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                         67193

                                                     (3) Compliance deadline for existing                 South Dearborn, Suite 2938, Chicago, IL               our determination is based on
                                                  sources. Existing sources lawfully                      60604; telephone 312–216–4720.                        scientifically sound data, assumptions,
                                                  discharging into publicly owned                         Persons who use a telecommunications                  and analyses. We invited these peer
                                                  treatment works on or between April 7,                  device for the deaf (TDD) may call the                reviewers to comment on our listing
                                                  2015 and June 28, 2016 shall comply                     Federal Information Relay Service                     proposal. We also considered all
                                                  with the PSES by August 29, 2019. All                   (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.                               comments and information we received
                                                  other existing sources shall comply by                  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                            during the comment period.
                                                  August 29, 2016.                                                                                                The SSA report underwent
                                                                                                          Executive Summary                                     independent peer review by 21
                                                  *      *    *    *     *
                                                  [FR Doc. 2016–23456 Filed 9–29–16; 8:45 am]                Why we need to publish a rule. Under               scientists with expertise in eastern
                                                  BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
                                                                                                          the Act, a species may warrant                        massasauga rattlesnake biology, habitat
                                                                                                          protection through listing if it is                   management, and stressors (factors
                                                                                                          endangered or threatened throughout all               negatively affecting the species) to the
                                                                                                          or a significant portion of its range.                species. The SSA report and other
                                                  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR                              Listing a species as an endangered                    materials relating to this determination
                                                  Fish and Wildlife Service                               species or threatened species can only                can be found on the Midwest Region
                                                                                                          be completed by issuing a rule.                       Web site at http://www.fws.gov/
                                                  50 CFR Part 17                                          Additionally, under the Act, critical                 midwest/Endangered/ and at http://
                                                                                                          habitat shall be designated, to the                   www.regulations.gov under Docket No.
                                                  [Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2015–0145;                        maximum extent prudent and                            FWS–R3–ES–2015–0145.
                                                  4500030113]                                             determinable, for any species
                                                                                                                                                                Previous Federal Actions
                                                                                                          determined to be an endangered species
                                                  RIN 1018–BA98                                                                                                   On September 30, 2015, the Service
                                                                                                          or threatened species under the Act. We
                                                                                                          have determined that designating                      published a proposed rule (80 FR
                                                  Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
                                                                                                          critical habitat is not prudent for the               58688) to list the eastern massasauga
                                                  and Plants; Threatened Species Status
                                                                                                          eastern massasauga rattlesnake due to                 rattlesnake as a threatened species
                                                  for the Eastern Massasauga
                                                                                                          an increased risk of collection and                   under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
                                                  Rattlesnake
                                                                                                          persecution.                                          We accepted public comments on the
                                                  AGENCY:   Fish and Wildlife Service,                       This rule makes final the listing of the           proposed rule for 60 days, ending
                                                  Interior.                                               eastern massasauga rattlesnake                        November 30, 2015. Please refer to the
                                                  ACTION: Final rule.                                     (Sistrurus catenatus) as a threatened                 proposed rule (80 FR 58688; September
                                                                                                          species.                                              30, 2015) for a detailed description of
                                                  SUMMARY:   We, the U.S. Fish and                           The basis for our action. Under the                previous Federal actions concerning this
                                                  Wildlife Service (Service), determine                   Act, we can determine that a species is               species.
                                                  threatened species status under the                     an endangered or threatened species
                                                                                                          based on any of five factors: (A) The                 Background
                                                  Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act),
                                                  as amended, for the eastern massasauga                  present or threatened destruction,                      Please refer to the proposed listing
                                                  rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus), a                    modification, or curtailment of its                   rule (80 FR 58688; September 30, 2015)
                                                  rattlesnake species found in 10 States                  habitat or range; (B) overutilization for             for a summary of species information.
                                                  and 1 Canadian Province. The rule adds                  commercial, recreational, scientific, or              Summary of Biological Status and
                                                  this species to the Federal List of                     educational purposes; (C) disease or
                                                                                                                                                                Threats
                                                  Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.                     predation; (D) the inadequacy of
                                                  We have also determined that the                        existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E)                  The Act directs us to determine
                                                  designation of critical habitat for the                 other natural or manmade factors                      whether any species is an endangered
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake is not                   affecting its continued existence.                    species or a threatened species because
                                                  prudent due to an increased risk of                     Although there are several factors that               of any factors affecting its continued
                                                  collection and persecution.                             are affecting the eastern massasauga                  existence. We completed a
                                                                                                          rattlesnake’s status, the loss of habitat             comprehensive assessment of the
                                                  DATES: This rule is effective October 31,
                                                                                                          was historically, and continues to be,                biological status of the eastern
                                                  2016.                                                                                                         massasauga rattlesnake, and prepared
                                                                                                          the primary threat, either through
                                                  ADDRESSES: This final rule is available                 development or through changes in                     the SSA report, which provides a
                                                  on the Internet at http://                              habitat structure due to vegetative                   thorough description of the species’
                                                  www.regulations.gov and http://                         succession.                                           overall viability. We generally defined
                                                  www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/                            Peer review and public comment. A                  viability as the ability of the species to
                                                  reptiles/eama/index.html. Comments                      Species Status Assessment (SSA) team                  maintain self-sustaining populations
                                                  and materials we received, as well as                   prepared an SSA report (Szymanski et                  over the long term. We used the
                                                  supporting documentation we used in                     al. 2016) for the eastern massasauga                  conservation biology principles of
                                                  preparing this rule, are available for                  rattlesnake. The SSA team was                         resiliency, representation, and
                                                  public inspection at http://                            composed of Service biologists, in                    redundancy in our analysis. Briefly,
                                                  www.regulations.gov or by appointment,                  consultation with other species experts.              resiliency is the ability of the species to
                                                  during normal business hours at: U.S.                   The SSA represents a compilation of the               withstand environmental stochasticity
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  Fish and Wildlife Service, Chicago                      best available scientific and commercial              (unpredictable fluctuations in
                                                  Ecological Services Field Office, 230                   data concerning the biological status of              environmental conditions (for example,
                                                  South Dearborn, Suite 2938, Chicago, IL                 the species, including the impacts of                 wet or dry, warm or cold years));
                                                  60604; telephone 312–216–4720.                          past, present, and future factors (both               redundancy is the ability of the species
                                                  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                        negative and beneficial) affecting the                to withstand catastrophic events (for
                                                  Louise Clemency, Field Supervisor, U.S.                 eastern massasauga rattlesnake. We                    example, droughts, hurricanes); and
                                                  Fish and Wildlife Service, Chicago                      sought comments on the SSA from                       representation is the ability of the
                                                  Ecological Services Field Office, 230                   independent specialists to ensure that                species to adapt over time to long-term


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00103   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67194            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  changes in the environment (for                         and ecological processes that maintain                structure our analysis of viability with
                                                  example, climate changes). In general,                  suitable habitat, and connectivity among              regards to representation.
                                                  the more redundant, representative, and                 these microhabitats. In the SSA report,
                                                                                                                                                                Species’ Current Condition
                                                  resilient a species is, the more likely it              a self-sustaining population of eastern
                                                  is to sustain populations over time, even               massasauga rattlesnakes is defined as                    The documented historical range of
                                                  under changing environmental                            one that is demographically, genetically,             the eastern massasauga rattlesnake
                                                  conditions. Using these principles, we                  and physiologically robust (a population              included sections of western New York,
                                                  considered the eastern massasauga                       with 50 or more adult females and a                   western Pennsylvania, southeastern
                                                  rattlesnake’s needs at the individual,                  stable or increasing growth rate), with a             Ontario, the upper and lower peninsulas
                                                  population, and species scales. We also                 high level of persistence (a probability              of Michigan, the northern two-thirds of
                                                  identified the beneficial factors and                   of persistence greater than 0.9) given its            Ohio and Indiana, the northern three-
                                                  stressors influencing the species’                      habitat conditions and the risk or                    quarters of Illinois, the southern half of
                                                  viability. We considered the degree to                  beneficial factors operating on it.                   Wisconsin, extreme southeast
                                                  which the species’ ecological needs are                    We relied on a population-specific                 Minnesota, east-central Missouri, and
                                                  met both currently and as can be                        model developed by Faust et al. (2011,                the eastern third of Iowa. The limits of
                                                  reliably forecasted into the future, and                entire) (hereafter referred to as the Faust           the current range of the species
                                                  we assessed the consequences of any                     model) to assess the health of                        resemble the boundaries of its historical
                                                  unmet needs as they relate to species                   populations across the eastern                        range; however, the geographic
                                                  viability. In this section, we summarize                massasauga rattlesnake’s range. Faust                 distribution of extant localities has been
                                                  the conclusions of the SSA, which can                   and colleagues developed a generic,                   restricted by the loss of populations
                                                  be accessed in the SSA report at http://                baseline model for a hypothetical,                    from much of the area within the
                                                  www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/ and                     healthy (growing) eastern massasauga                  boundaries of that range. As a result of
                                                  at http://www.regulations.gov under                     rattlesnake population. Using this                    the stressors acting on eastern
                                                  Docket No. FWS–R3–ES–2015–0145.                         baseline model and site-specific                      massasauga rattlesnake populations, the
                                                     For survival and reproduction at the                 information, including population size                resiliency of the eastern massasauga
                                                  individual level, the eastern massasauga                estimate, stressors operating at the site,            rattlesnake across its range and within
                                                  rattlesnake requires appropriate habitat,               and potential future management                       each of the three analysis units has
                                                  which varies depending on the season                    changes that might address those                      declined from its historically known
                                                  and its life stage (see Background                      stressors, the Faust model forecasted the             condition. Rangewide, there are 558
                                                  section of the proposed listing rule at 80              future condition of 57 eastern                        known historical eastern massasauga
                                                  FR 58688, September 30, 2015). During                   massasauga rattlesnake populations over               rattlesnake populations, of which 263
                                                  the winter (generally October through                   three different time spans (10, 25, and               are known to still be extant, 211 are
                                                  March), they occupy hibernacula, such                   50 years) (for more details on the Faust              likely extirpated or known extirpated,
                                                  as crayfish burrows. Hydrology at                       model, see pp. 4–6 in the SSA report).                and 84 are of unknown status. For the
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake sites is                 We extrapolated the Faust model results               purposes of our assessment, we
                                                  important in maintaining conditions                     and supplemental information gathered                 considered all populations with extant
                                                  with high enough water levels to                        since 2011 to forecast the future                     or unknown statuses to be currently
                                                  support the survival of hibernating                     conditions of the other (non-modeled;                 extant (referred to as presumed extant,
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnakes. During                 n = 290) eastern massasauga rattlesnake               n = 347). Of those 347 populations
                                                  their active season (after they emerge                  populations.                                          presumed extant, 40 percent (n = 139)
                                                  from hibernacula), they require sparse                     At the species level, the eastern                  are likely quasi-extirpated (have 25 or
                                                  canopy cover and sunny areas                            massasauga rattlesnake requires                       fewer adult females, which was
                                                  (intermixed with shaded areas) for                      multiple (redundant), self-sustaining                 considered by the Faust model to be too
                                                  thermoregulation (basking and retreat                   (resilient) populations distributed across            small to be viable (see the SSA report,
                                                  sites), abundant prey (foraging sites),                 areas of genetic and ecological diversity             pp. 46–47, for details)).
                                                  and the ability to escape predators                     (representative) to be sustainable over                  The rangewide number of presumed
                                                  (retreat sites). Habitat structure,                     the long term. Using the literature on                extant populations has declined from
                                                  including early successional stage and                  distribution of genetic diversity across              the number that was known historically
                                                  low canopy cover, appears to be more                    the range of this species, we identified              by 38 percent (and 24 percent of the
                                                  important for eastern massasauga                        three geographic ‘‘analysis units’’                   presumed extant populations have
                                                  rattlesnake habitat than plant                          corresponding to ‘‘clumped’’ genetic                  unknown statuses). Of those
                                                  community composition or soil type.                     variation patterns across the eastern                 populations presumed extant, 139 (40
                                                  Maintaining such habitat structure may                  massasauga rattlesnake populations (see               percent) are presumed to be quasi-
                                                  require periodic management of most                     Figure 1, below). A reasonable                        extirpated while 105 (30 percent) are
                                                  habitat types occupied by the eastern                   conclusion from the composite of                      presumed to be demographically,
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake.                                 genetic studies that exist (Gibbs et al.              genetically, and physiologically robust
                                                     At the population level, the eastern                 1997, entire; Andre 2003, entire;                     (see Table 1, below). Of these presumed
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake requires                         Chiucchi and Gibbs 2010, entire; Ray et               demographically, genetically, and
                                                  sufficient population size, population                  al. 2013, entire) is that there are broad-            physiologically robust populations, 19
                                                  growth, survivorship (the number of                     scale genetic differences across the                  (0.5 percent of the presumed extant
                                                  individuals that survive over time),                    range of the eastern massasauga                       populations) are presumed to have
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  recruitment (adding individuals to the                  rattlesnake, and within these broad                   conditions (stressors affecting the
                                                  population through birth or                             units, there is genetic diversity among               species at those populations are
                                                  immigration), and population structure                  populations comprising the broad units.               nonexistent or of low impact) suitable
                                                  (the number and age classes of both                     Thus, we interpret these genetic                      for maintaining populations over time
                                                  sexes) to be sustainable over the long                  variation patterns to represent areas of              and, thus, are self-sustaining. The
                                                  term. Populations also require a                        unique adaptive diversity. We                         greatest declines in resiliency occurred
                                                  sufficient quantity of high-quality                     subsequently use these analysis units                 in the western analysis unit, where only
                                                  microhabitats with intact hydrological                  (western, central, and eastern) to                    20 populations are presumed extant,


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00104   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                         Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                                                                      67195

                                                  and, of these, only 1 population is                                        a lesser degree, in the central and                                        and 6 populations, respectively, are
                                                  presumed to be self-sustaining. Loss of                                    eastern analysis units, where only 23                                      presumed to be self-sustaining.
                                                  resiliency has also occurred, although to

                                                                                                    TABLE 1—THE NUMBER OF POPULATIONS BY STATUS RANGEWIDE
                                                                                                                     [DGP = demographically, genetically, and physiologically]

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Number of         Percentage
                                                                                                                              Status                                                                                    populations       of presumed
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        rangewide      extant populations

                                                  Presumed Extant ...............................................................................................................................................                347   ..............................
                                                  Quasi-extirpated .................................................................................................................................................             139                          40
                                                  DGP robust ........................................................................................................................................................            105                          30
                                                  Self-sustaining ...................................................................................................................................................             19                            0.5



                                                    The degree of representation, as                                         occurrence (as measured by a reduction                                     comparison among years. The reasons
                                                  measured by spatial extent of                                              in area) rangewide (see Table 2, below).                                   for this are twofold: (1) The calculations
                                                  occurrence (a measurement of the                                           This loss has not been uniform, with the                                   are done at the county, rather than the
                                                  spatial spread of the areas currently                                      western analysis unit encompassing                                         population, level; and (2) if at least one
                                                  occupied by a species), across the range                                   most of this decline (70 percent                                           population was projected to be extant,
                                                  of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake                                      reduction in extent of occurrence in the                                   the entire county was included in the
                                                  has declined, as illustrated by the higher                                 western analysis unit). However, losses                                    analysis, even if other populations in
                                                  proportion of populations lost in the                                      of 33 percent and 26 percent of the                                        the county were projected to be
                                                  southern and western part of the range                                     extent of occurrence in the central                                        extirpated. Assuming that the loss of
                                                  and by the loss of area occupied within                                    analysis unit and eastern analysis unit,                                   extent of occurrence equates to loss of
                                                  the analysis units (see Figure 1, below;                                   respectively, are notable as well. The                                     adaptive diversity, the degree of
                                                  see also pp. 52–55 in the SSA report).                                     results are not a true measure of area                                     representation of the eastern massasauga
                                                  Overall, there has been more than a 41                                     occupied by the species, but rather a                                      rattlesnake has declined since historical
                                                  percent reduction of extent of                                             coarse evaluation to make relative                                         conditions.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014         18:28 Sep 29, 2016         Jkt 238001      PO 00000        Frm 00105       Fmt 4700       Sfmt 4700      E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM              30SER1


                                                  67196                Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations




                                                    TABLE 2—THE PERCENT REDUCTION are underwater. The water in the                                                     by intensity, with D1 being the least
                                                     IN EXTENT OF OCCURRENCE FROM hibernacula protects the eastern                                                     intense drought and D4 being the most
                                                     HISTORICAL TO PRESENT DAY    massasauga rattlesnake from                                                          intense drought. For the eastern
                                                                                                                 dehydration and freezing, and,                        massasauga rattlesnake, the risk of unit-
                                                                                                 Percent         therefore, dropping water levels in the               wide extirpation due to a catastrophic
                                                             Analysis unit                                       winter leaves the snakes vulnerable to                drought varies by analysis unit and by
                                                                                                reduction
                                                                                                                 both (Kingsbury 2002, p. 38; Moore and                the level of drought considered. Experts
                                                  Western ................................                  70   Gillingham 2006, p. 750; Smith 2009, p.               believe drought intensities of magnitude
                                                  Central ..................................                33   5). Because individual eastern                        D2 or higher are likely to make the
                                                  Eastern .................................                 26   massasauga rattlesnakes often return to               species more vulnerable to overwinter
                                                  Rangewide ............................                    41   the same hibernacula year after year,                 mortality and cause catastrophic
                                                                                                                 dropping water levels in hibernacula                  impacts to eastern massasauga
                                                     The redundancy of the eastern                               could potentially decimate an entire                  rattlesnake populations. In the central
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake has also                                population if the majority of individuals             and eastern analysis units, the annual
                                                  declined since historical conditions. We                       in that population hibernate in the same              frequency rate for a D3 or D4 drought is
                                                  evaluated the effects of potential                             area.                                                 zero, so there is little to no risk of unit-
                                                  catastrophic drought events on the                               We assessed the vulnerability of unit-              wide extirpation regardless of how
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake. Extreme                        wide extirpation due to varying drought               broadly dispersed the species is within
                                                  fluctuations in the water table may                            intensities, as summarized below (for a               the unit. In the eastern analysis unit, the
                                                  negatively affect body condition for the                       detailed description of the analysis, see             annual frequency rate for a D2 drought
                                                  following active season, cause early                           the SSA report, pp. 55–60, 81–82). The                is also zero. Portions of the central
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  emergence, or cause direct mortality                           Drought Monitor (a weekly map of                      analysis unit are at risk of a D2-level
                                                  (Harvey and Weatherhead 2006, p. 71;                           drought conditions that is produced                   catastrophic drought; populations in the
                                                  Smith 2009, pp. vii, 33, 38–39). Changes                       jointly by the National Oceanic and                   southern portion of the central analysis
                                                  in water levels under certain                                  Atmospheric Administration, the U.S.                  unit and scattered portions in the north
                                                  circumstances can cause mortality to                           Department of Agriculture, and the                    are at risk from such a drought. In the
                                                  individuals, particularly during                               National Drought Mitigation Center                    western analysis unit, the risk of unit-
                                                  hibernation (Johnson et al. 2000, p. 26;                       (NDMC) at the University of Nebraska-                 wide extirpation based on the frequency
                                                  Kingsbury 2002, p. 38), when the snakes
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ER30SE16.026</GPH>




                                                                                                                 Lincoln) classifies general drought areas             of a D3 drought is low, but the risk of


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014       18:28 Sep 29, 2016      Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00106   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                         67197

                                                  losing clusters of populations within the               reducing the viability of that                        habitat components necessary for the
                                                  western analysis unit is notable; 5 of the              population. Habitat is also lost due to               survival of the snakes.
                                                  8 population clusters are vulnerable to                 invasion of nonnative plant species,                     Because of the fear and negative
                                                  a catastrophic drought. The probability                 dam construction, fire suppression,                   perception of snakes, many people have
                                                  of unit-wide extirpation in the western                 manipulation of ground water levels,                  a low interest in snakes or their
                                                  analysis unit is notably higher with D2                 and other incompatible habitat                        conservation and consequently large
                                                  frequency rates; 7 of the 8 clusters of                 modifications (Jellen 2005, p. 33). These             numbers of snakes are deliberately
                                                  populations are at risk of D2-level                     habitat losses continue even in publicly              killed (Whitaker and Shine 2000, p. 121;
                                                  catastrophic drought. Thus, the                         held areas protected from development.                Alves et al. 2014, p. 2). Human-snake
                                                  probability of losing most populations                    Vegetative succession is a major                    encounters frequently result in the
                                                  within the western analysis unit due to                 contributor to habitat loss of the eastern            death of the snake (Whitaker and Shine
                                                  a catastrophic drought is high (0.82                    massasauga rattlesnake (Johnson and                   2000, pp. 125–126). Given the species’
                                                  probability of unit-wide extirpation).                  Breisch 1993, pp. 50–53; Reinert and                  site fidelity and ease of capture once
                                                                                                          Buskar 1992, pp. 56–58). The open                     located, the eastern massasauga
                                                  Assessment of Threats and
                                                                                                          vegetative structure, typical of eastern              rattlesnake is particularly susceptible to
                                                  Conservation Measures
                                                                                                          massasauga rattlesnake habitat, provides              collection. Poaching and unauthorized
                                                     The most prominent stressors                         the desirable thermoregulatory areas,                 collection of the eastern massasauga
                                                  affecting the eastern massasauga                        increases prey densities by enhancing                 rattlesnake for the pet trade is a factor
                                                  rattlesnake include habitat loss and                    the growth of sedges and grasses, and                 contributing to declines in this species
                                                  fragmentation, especially through                       provides retreat sites. Degradation of                (for example, Jellen 2005, p. 11; Baily et
                                                  development and vegetative succession;                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake habitat                al. 2011, p. 171).
                                                  road mortality; hydrologic alteration                   typically happens through woody                          Assessing the occurrence of the
                                                  (hydrologic drawdown) resulting in                      vegetation encroachment or the                        above-mentioned stressors, we found
                                                  drought or artificial flooding;                         introduction of nonnative plant species.              that 94 percent of the presumed extant
                                                  persecution; collection; and mortality of               These events alter the structure of the               eastern massasauga rattlesnake
                                                  individuals as a result of habitat                      habitat and make it unsuitable for the                populations have at least one stressor
                                                  management that includes post-                          eastern massasauga rattlesnake by                     (with some degree of impact on the
                                                  emergent (after hibernation) prescribed                 reducing and eventually eliminating                   species) currently affecting the site.
                                                  fire and mowing for habitat                             thermoregulatory and retreat areas. Fire              Habitat loss or modification is the most
                                                  management. Habitat loss includes                       suppression has promoted vegetative                   commonly occurring stressor (see Figure
                                                  direct habitat destruction of native land               succession and led to the widespread                  2, below). Some form of habitat loss or
                                                  types (for example, grassland, swamp,                   loss of open canopy habitats through                  modification is occurring at 55 percent
                                                  fen, bog, wet prairie, sedge meadow,                    succession (Kingsbury 2002, p. 37).                   of the sites; 3 percent of these sites are
                                                  marshland, peatland, floodplain forest,                 Alteration in habitat structure and                   at risk of total habitat loss (all habitat at
                                                  coniferous forest) due to conversion to                 quality can also affect eastern                       the site being destroyed or becoming
                                                  agricultural land, development, and                     massasauga rattlesnakes by reducing the               unusable by the species). Fragmentation
                                                  infrastructure associated with                          forage for the species’ prey base                     is the second most common factor (49
                                                  development (roads, bridges). Because                   (Kingsbury 2002, p. 37).                              percent of sites), and unmanaged
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake habitat                    Roads, bridges, and other structures                vegetative succession is the third most
                                                  varies seasonally and also varies over its              constructed in eastern massasauga                     common factor (31 percent of sites).
                                                  range, the destruction of parts of a                    rattlesnake habitat fragment the snakes’              Among the other stressors, road
                                                  population’s habitat (for example,                      habitat and impact the species both                   mortality occurs at 20 percent,
                                                  hibernacula or gestational sites) may                   through direct mortality as snakes are                collection or persecution at 17 percent,
                                                  cause a negative effect to individual                   killed trying to cross these structures               water fluctuation at 7 percent, and pre-
                                                  snakes, thus reducing the numbers of                    (Shepard et al. 2008b, p. 6), as well as              or post-emergent fire at less than 1
                                                  individuals in a population and, in turn,               indirectly through the loss of access to              percent of the sites.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00107   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67198            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations




                                                     We also considered the magnitude of                  moderate habitat loss or modification.                implementation of conservation actions.
                                                  impact of the various stressors (see                    Our analysis shows that 84 percent of                 Furthermore, these multiple factors are
                                                  Figure 3, below). The Faust model                       eastern massasauga rattlesnake                        not acting independently, but are acting
                                                  indicates that the stressors most likely                populations are impacted by at least one              together, which can result in cumulative
                                                  to push a population to quasi-                          high magnitude stressor, and 63 percent               effects that lower the overall viability of
                                                  extirpation within 25 years (high                       are affected by multiple high magnitude               the species. For a description of the
                                                  magnitude stressors) are late-stage                     stressors. These stressors are chronic                methods used in this threats assessment,
                                                  vegetative succession, high habitat                     and are expected to continue with a                   refer to pages 39–43 of the SSA report.
                                                  fragmentation, moderate habitat                         similar magnitude of impact into the
                                                  fragmentation, total habitat loss, and                  future, unless ameliorated by increased
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                                                                                                                                                                              ER30SE16.027</GPH>




                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00108   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                     67199




                                                     In addition to the above stressors,                  impacts from these factors.                           exist for one population in Ohio, one
                                                  other factors may be affecting                          Additionally, this species is vulnerable              population in Wisconsin, and
                                                  individuals. Disease (whether new or                    to the effects of climate change through              populations on State-owned lands in
                                                  currently existing at low levels but                    increasing intensity of winter droughts               Michigan. These CCAAs include actions
                                                  increasing in prevalence) is another                    and increasing risk of summer floods,                 to mediate the stressors acting upon the
                                                  emerging and potentially catastrophic                   particularly in the southwestern part of              populations and provide management
                                                  stressor to eastern massasauga                          its range (Pomara et al., undated;                    prescriptions to perpetuate eastern
                                                  rattlesnake populations. In the eastern                 Pomara et al. 2014, pp. 95–97). Thus,                 massasauga rattlesnakes on these sites.
                                                  and Midwestern United States, the                       while we acknowledge and considered                   The Wisconsin Department of Natural
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake is                       that disease, road mortality, persecution             Resources (DNR) developed a CCAA for
                                                  specifically vulnerable to disease due to               and collection, and climate changes are               one population in Wisconsin. Through
                                                  Ophidiomyces fungal infections (snake                   factors that affect the species, and which            the agreement, existing savanna habitat
                                                  fungal disease (SFD)). The emergence of                 may increase or exacerbate existing                   on State land, especially important to
                                                  SFD has been recently documented in                     threats in the future, our viability                  gravid (pregnant) females, will be
                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake                      assessment does not include a                         managed to maintain and expand open
                                                  (Allender et al. 2011, pp. 2383–2384)                   quantitative analysis of these stressors.             canopy habitat, restore additional
                                                  and many other reptiles (Cheatwood et                      The eastern massasauga rattlesnake is              savanna habitat, and enhance
                                                  al. 2003, pp. 333–334; Clark et al. 2011,               State-listed as endangered in Iowa,                   connectivity between habitat areas. In
                                                  p. 890; Paré et al. 2003, pp. 12–13;                   Illinois, Indiana, New York, Ohio,                    Ohio, a CCAA for a State Nature
                                                  Rajeev et al. 2009, pp. 1265–1267; Sigler               Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and is                   Preserve population addresses threats
                                                  et al. 2013, pp. 3343–3344; Sleeman                     listed as endangered in Ontario. In                   from habitat loss from the prevalence of
                                                  2013, p. 1), and is concerning because                  Michigan, the species is listed as                    late-stage successional vegetation, the
                                                  of its broad geographic and taxonomic                   ‘‘special concern,’’ and a Director of                threat of fire both pre- and post-
                                                  distributions. However, we did not have                 Natural Resources Order (No. DFI–                     emergence of eastern massasauga
                                                  sufficient information on the emergence                 166.98) prohibits take except by permit.              rattlesnakes, and limited connectivity
                                                  and future spread of SFD or other                          Of the 263 sites with extant eastern               through habitat fragmentation.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  diseases to reliably model this stressor                massasauga populations rangewide, 62                     The State of Michigan developed a
                                                  for forecasting future conditions for the               percent (164) occur on land (public and               CCAA that will provide for management
                                                  rattlesnake. Our quantitative modeling                  private) that is considered protected                 of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes on
                                                  analysis also does not consider two                     from development; development at the                  State-owned lands. This area includes
                                                  other prominent stressors, road                         other 38 percent of sites may result in               33 known eastern massasauga
                                                  mortality and persecution and                           loss or fragmentation of habitat. Signed              occurrences, which represents
                                                  collection, due to a lack of specific                   candidate conservation agreements with                approximately 34 percent of the known
                                                                                                                                                                                                           ER30SE16.028</GPH>




                                                  information on the magnitude of                         assurances (CCAAs) with the Service                   extant occurrences within the State and


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00109   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67200            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  10 percent rangewide. In addition, other                likely to persist over the next 10, 25,               populations are likely to persist in all
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake sites on                 and 50 years, and extrapolated those                  three analysis units; however, the
                                                  county- or municipally owned land, as                   proportions to the remaining presumed                 distribution of the range is predicted to
                                                  well as on privately owned land, could                  extant populations to forecast the                    contract northeasterly, and the
                                                  be included in the CCAA through                         number of self-sustaining populations                 geographic area occupied will decline
                                                  Certificates of Inclusion issued by the                 likely to persist at the future time scales.          within each analysis unit over time. The
                                                  Michigan Department of Natural                          We then predicted the change in                       results project an 80 percent reduction
                                                  Resources (MI DNR) prior to the                         representation and redundancy. The                    of the area occupied by the eastern
                                                  effective date of listing (see DATES,                   most pertinent results are summarized                 massasauga rattlesnake rangewide by
                                                  above). The CCAA includes                               below. For the full results for all time              year 50, with the western analysis unit
                                                  management strategies with                              periods, refer to pages 61–76 of the SSA              comprising most of the decline (91
                                                  conservation measures designed to                       report.                                               percent reduction within the unit).
                                                  benefit the eastern massasauga                             The projected future resiliency (the               These projected declines in extent of
                                                  rattlesnake; these management strategies                number of self-sustaining populations)                occurrence across the species’ range and
                                                  will be implemented on approximately                    varies across the eastern massasauga                  within the analysis units suggest that
                                                  136,311 acres (55,263 hectares) of State-               rattlesnake’s range. In the western                   loss of adaptive diversity is likely to
                                                  owned land. Many of these management                    analysis unit, 83 percent of the modeled              occur.
                                                  actions are ongoing, but we do not have                 populations are projected to have a                      We assessed the ability of eastern
                                                  site-specific data on these management                  declining trajectory. Furthermore, 94                 massasauga rattlesnake populations to
                                                  actions to include them in our analysis                 percent of the populations have a low                 withstand catastrophic events
                                                  in the SSA. Nonetheless, we determine                   probability of persistence (the                       (redundancy) by predicting the number
                                                  that the management actions proposed                    probability of remaining above the                    of self-sustaining populations in each
                                                  will address some of the threats (for                   quasi-extirpated threshold of 25 adult                analysis unit and the spatial dispersion
                                                  example, habitat loss, vegetative                       females is less than 90 percent) by year              of those populations relative to future
                                                  succession) impacting populations on                    25, and, thus, the number of forecasted               drought risk.
                                                  State lands in Michigan.                                populations likely to be extant declines                 The projected future redundancy (the
                                                     We did not assess the CCAAs under                    over time. By year 50, 18 of the 20                   number and spatial dispersion of self-
                                                  our Policy for Evaluation of                            presumed extant populations are                       sustaining populations) across the
                                                  Conservation Efforts When Making                        projected to be extirpated (no                        eastern massasauga rattlesnake’s range
                                                  Listing Decisions (PECE policy) (68 FR                  individuals remain) or quasi-extirpated,              varies. In the western analysis unit, the
                                                  15100; March 28, 2003) because the                      with only 1 population projected to be                risk of analysis-unit-wide extirpations
                                                  plans cover only a small part of the                    self-sustaining. The resiliency of the                from either a D2 or D3 catastrophic
                                                  range of the species, and the                           western analysis unit is forecasted to                drought is high, given the low number
                                                  conservation measures in the plans will                 decline over time. The situation is                   of populations forecasted to be extant.
                                                  not change the overall biological status                similar in the central and eastern                    Coupling this with a likely concurrent
                                                  of the species.                                         analysis units, but to a lesser degree. In            decline in population clusters (reduced
                                                     We have information that at an                       the central analysis unit, 70 percent of              spatial dispersion), the risk of analysis-
                                                  additional 22 sites (that are not covered               the modeled populations are projected                 unit-wide extirpation is likely even
                                                  by a CCAA), habitat restoration or                      to have a declining trajectory and 78                 higher. Thus, the level of redundancy in
                                                  management, or both, is occurring;                      percent a low probability of persistence,             the western analysis unit is projected to
                                                  however, we do not have enough                          and thus, by year 50, 180 of the 256                  decline into the future.
                                                  information for these sites to know if                  presumed extant populations are                          Conversely, in the eastern analysis
                                                  habitat management has mediated the                     projected to be extirpated or quasi-                  unit, there is little to no risk of a D2- or
                                                  current stressors acting upon the                       extirpated, and 47 populations to be                  D3-level drought, and consequently the
                                                  populations. The Faust model, however,                  self-sustaining. In the eastern analysis              probability of unit-wide extirpation due
                                                  did include these kinds of activities in                unit, 83 percent of the modeled                       to a catastrophic drought is very low.
                                                  the projections of trends, and, thus, our               populations are projected to have a                   Thus, redundancy, from a catastrophic
                                                  future condition analyses are based on                  declining trajectory and 92 percent of                drought perspective, is not expected to
                                                  the assumption that ongoing restoration                 the populations are projected to have a               decline over time in the eastern analysis
                                                  would continue into the future. Lastly,                 low probability of persistence, and,                  unit.
                                                  an additional 18 populations have                       thus, by year 50, 65 of the 71 presumed                  Similarly, in the central analysis unit,
                                                  conservation plans in place. Although                   extant populations are projected to be                there is little to no risk of a D3
                                                  these plans are intended to manage for                  extirpated or quasi-extirpated, and 6 to              catastrophic drought. The southern and
                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake,                     be self-sustaining. Rangewide, 54 (16                 northern portions of the central analysis
                                                  sufficient site-specific information is not             percent) of the 347 populations that are              unit, however, are at risk of a D2-level
                                                  available to assess whether these                       currently presumed to be extant are                   catastrophic drought. Losses of
                                                  restoration or management activities are                projected to be self-sustaining by year               populations in these areas may lead to
                                                  currently ameliorating the stressors                    50.                                                   portions of the central analysis unit
                                                  acting upon the population. Thus, we                       We calculated the future extent of                 being extirpated and will also increase
                                                  were unable to include the potential                    occurrence (representation) for the 57                the probability of analysis-unit-wide
                                                  beneficial impacts into our quantitative                modeled populations (Faust model) and                 extirpation. However, the risk of
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  analyses.                                               for the populations forecasted to persist             analysis-unit-wide extirpation will
                                                                                                          at years 10, 25, and 50 by using the                  likely remain low given the presumed
                                                  Species’ Projected Future Condition                     counties occupied by populations to                   persistence of multiple populations
                                                    To assess the future resiliency,                      evaluate the proportions of the range                 scattered throughout low drought risk
                                                  representation, and redundancy of the                   falling within each analysis unit and the             areas. Thus, from a drought perspective,
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake, we used                 change in spatial distribution within                 the level of redundancy is not likely to
                                                  the Faust model results to predict the                  each analysis unit. Our results indicate              be noticeably reduced in the central
                                                  number of self-sustaining populations                   that eastern massasauga rattlesnake                   analysis unit (see Figure 4.3 (p. 60) in


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00110   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                       67201

                                                  the SSA report for a detailed map). A                   of the SSA report are slightly different              habitats until May 15 in ways that do
                                                  caveat to this conclusion, however, is                  from those in the first version that was              not violate section 9 of the Act.
                                                  that the forecasted decline in extent of                used for the proposed rule. None of the                  Our Response: We agree that the best
                                                  occurrence suggests our data are too                    new information we received changed                   available information suggests that,
                                                  coarse to tease out whether the                         our determination in this final rule that             upon emerging from hibernation, most
                                                  forecasted decline in populations will                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake is a               eastern massasauga rattlesnakes do
                                                  lead to substantial losses in spatial                   threatened species.                                   remain lethargic, and stay in the vicinity
                                                  distribution, and, thus, the risk of                                                                          of their burrows (usually located in
                                                                                                          Summary of Comments and                               wetlands) for up to several weeks, and
                                                  analysis-unit-wide extirpation might be
                                                                                                          Recommendations                                       during that time they are especially
                                                  higher than predicted. Therefore, the
                                                  future trend in the level of redundancy                   In the proposed rule published on                   vulnerable to risks from predation,
                                                  in the central analysis unit is less clear              September 30, 2015 (80 FR 58688), we                  prescribed fire, or other sources of
                                                  than for either the western analysis unit               requested that all interested parties                 mortality. Prior to emergence from
                                                  or the eastern analysis unit.                           submit written comments on the                        hibernation, when eastern massasauga
                                                     Given the loss of populations to date,               proposal by November 30, 2015. We                     rattlesnakes still have some protection
                                                  portions of the eastern massasauga                      also contacted appropriate Federal and                in the confines of the burrows in which
                                                  rattlesnake’s range are in imminent risk                State agencies, scientific experts and                they hibernate, they are relatively
                                                  of extirpation in the near term.                        organizations, and other interested                   protected from sources of mortality that
                                                  Specifically, our analysis suggests there               parties and invited them to comment on                would take place on the surface. Thus,
                                                  is a high risk of extirpation of the                    the proposal. Newspaper notices                       risk of mortality caused by prescribed
                                                  western analysis unit and of southern                   inviting general public comment were                  fire is greatest when snakes are above
                                                  portions of the central and eastern                     published in USA Today. We did not                    ground (Durbian 2006, pp. 329–330;
                                                  analysis units within 10 to 25 years.                   receive any requests for a public                     Cross et al. 2015, pp. 346–347). Many
                                                  Although self-sustaining populations                    hearing. All substantive information                  populations of eastern massasauga
                                                  are expected to persist, loss of other                  provided during the comment period                    rattlesnakes are small, and in such
                                                  populations within the central and                      has either been incorporated directly                 populations, loss of only a few
                                                  eastern analysis units are expected to                  into this final determination or is                   individuals can have significant impacts
                                                  continue as well, and, thus, those                      addressed below.                                      (Seigel and Sheil 1999, p. 20), and
                                                  populations are at risk of extirpation in                                                                     prescribed fire was one of the most
                                                                                                          Peer Reviewer Comments
                                                  the future. These losses have led to                                                                          prominent stressors we identified in the
                                                  reductions in resiliency and redundancy                   In accordance with our peer review                  SSA for the eastern massasauga
                                                  across the range and may lead to                        policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR               rattlesnake.
                                                  irreplaceable loss of adaptive diversity                34270), we solicited review of the SSA                   Unfortunately, within the range of
                                                  across the range of the eastern                         report from 32 knowledgeable                          this species, unpredictable late winter
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake, thereby leaving                 individuals with scientific expertise that            or spring weather patterns, and resulting
                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake less                 included familiarity with eastern                     ground conditions (such as humidity,
                                                  able to adapt to a changing environment                 massasauga rattlesnake and its habitat,               snow cover, prevailing winds), provide
                                                  into the future. Thus, the viability of the             biological needs, and threats. We                     a number of constraints to land
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake has                      received responses from 21 of the peer                managers who need to implement
                                                  declined and is projected to continue to                reviewers.                                            prescribed fires to maintain habitats.
                                                  decline over the next 50 years.                           We reviewed all comments we                         Thus, we are also aware that a challenge
                                                     The reader is directed to the SSA                    received from the peer reviewers for                  to managing occupied eastern
                                                  report for a more detailed discussion of                substantive issues and new information                massasauga habitat with prescribed fire
                                                  our evaluation of the biological status of              regarding the eastern massasauga                      is determining the best time to apply
                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake and                  rattlesnake. Peer reviewer comments are               fire without risking mortality. At most
                                                  the influences that may affect its                      addressed in an appendix to the SSA                   of the known sites within the range of
                                                  continued existence. Our conclusions                    report, and in the SSA itself, as                     the eastern massasauga rattlesnake that
                                                  are based upon the best available                       appropriate.                                          were included in our analysis,
                                                  scientific and commercial data.                                                                               populations are small and vulnerable to
                                                                                                          Federal Agency Comments
                                                                                                                                                                additive mortality (any mortality
                                                  Summary of Changes From the                                (1) Comment: The U.S. Forest Service               beyond that which would be expected
                                                  Proposed Rule                                           (Huron-Manistee National Forest) stated               from predation or other natural factors),
                                                     In preparing this final rule, we                     that there is a need to differentiate                 as could occur from poorly timed
                                                  reviewed and fully considered                           between upland and lowland habitat in                 prescribed fire. While land managers
                                                  comments from the public and peer                       regard to seasonal restrictions on                    often request ‘‘cutoff’’ dates before
                                                  reviewers on the proposed rule. This                    prescribed burning within management                  which burns can be assumed to be safe,
                                                  final rule incorporates minor changes to                units of the Huron-Manistee National                  natural variation in weather cycles can
                                                  our proposed listing based on the                       Forest where eastern massasauga                       affect the dates when snakes emerge
                                                  comments we received, as discussed                      rattlesnakes occur. The Forest Service                from hibernation, with fluctuations of 1
                                                  below in Summary of Comments and                        cited a conservation plan (Kingsbury                  to 3 weeks not being uncommon. In
                                                  Recommendations, and newly available                    2002) that stated that upon emerging                  addition to the conservation plan
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  scientific data. The SSA report was                     from hibernation, most eastern                        (Kingsbury 2002, entire) provided by the
                                                  updated based on additional data                        massasauga rattlesnakes are lethargic                 Forest Service, and that was also
                                                  provided, primarily by State fish and                   and constrained by cool temperatures,                 reviewed in our SSA, we discussed
                                                  wildlife agencies. These data allowed us                and so remain in the vicinity of their                emergence biology of eastern
                                                  to refine site-specific information and                 wetland burrows through mid-May.                      massasauga rattlesnakes at the latitude
                                                  improve our understanding of status for                 They also recommended that the                        of the Huron-Manistee National Forest
                                                  several populations. Thus, the final                    Service provide a framework for                       with Dr. Bruce Kingsbury (2016, pers.
                                                  numerical results in the second version                 allowing prescribed fire in upland                    comm.). Kingsbury shared additional


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00111   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67202            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  observations of emerging eastern                        the Act. In addition, private and State               and that the SSA represents the best
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes in northern                     land managers can work with the                       available information on the eastern
                                                  Michigan since his 2002 conservation                    Service to develop plans and determine                massasauga rattlesnake in their State.
                                                  plan; he added that his observations                    if permits are appropriate to conduct                   Our Response: We thank the staffs of
                                                  since 2002 now indicate that many                       recovery efforts.                                     PBFC and WI DNR, as well as other
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnakes that                                                                          State and county conservation agencies
                                                                                                          Comments From States                                  and NGOs, for assisting us in compiling
                                                  emerge from hibernation in central and
                                                  northern Michigan in April begin to                        (2) Comment: A State fish and                      the best available information on the
                                                  disperse into adjacent habitats as early                wildlife management agency                            current distribution and status of the
                                                  as May 1. Because of this, Kingsbury                    (Pennsylvania Boat and Fish                           eastern massasauga rattlesnake
                                                  cautioned against reliance on a firm                    Commission (PBFC)), a State advisory                  throughout its range and for providing
                                                  calendar date as a rule by which to plan                group (Pennsylvania Biological Survey),               review of the SSA report.
                                                  prescribed fires if unintentional                       and a private individual stated that the                (5) Comment: A State fish and
                                                  mortality is to be avoided. Instead, he                 eastern massasauga rattlesnake has                    wildlife management agency (PBFC) and
                                                  urged land managers to use predictive                   experienced a large range reduction in                the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy
                                                  models to help forecast when eastern                    Pennsylvania, and current surveys                     (an NGO) commented that an Eastern
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes are most likely                 confirm that extant populations remain                Massasauga Species Action Plan for
                                                  to emerge from hibernacula in a given                   at only three sites in the State. They                Pennsylvania was compiled in 2011, to
                                                  region and year. We thus cannot provide                 further commented that the remaining                  prioritize and guide research and
                                                  the framework requested by the Forest                   populations are isolated from one                     conservation actions at the State’s extant
                                                  Service to conclude that use of                         another and subject to continued threats              and presumed extant sites, and noted
                                                  prescribed fire before May 15 will never                of habitat alteration, persecution, and               recent conservation and management
                                                  result in ‘‘take’’ of the eastern                       illegal collecting.                                   actions under that plan. A copy of the
                                                                                                             Our Response: We thank the                         plan was provided.
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake.
                                                                                                          commenters for the detailed                             Our Response: We thank the
                                                     Because the issue of using prescribed                information. These data corroborate our               commenters for providing a copy of the
                                                  fire as a tool for maintaining suitable                 analysis. We considered the continued                 plan, and we incorporated actions
                                                  habitat for eastern massasauga                          decline of the eastern massasauga                     outlined in the plan into our revised
                                                  rattlesnakes is so important, but also                  rattlesnake in Pennsylvania, as well as               SSA report. When the species is listed
                                                  understandably controversial (due to the                other States in the range of the eastern              (see DATES, above), conservation and
                                                  potential for additive mortality), the                  massasauga rattlesnake, in the SSA, and               recovery planning will involve multiple
                                                  Service funded a study (from 2010                       agree that the best available information             stakeholders. In addition, relatively new
                                                  through 2015) of rangewide phenology                    indicates that this species is declining              tools (such as spatially explicit habitat
                                                  (relation between climate and periodic                  in Pennsylvania. Based on the status                  models or collaborative processes such
                                                  biological phenomena) of the species to                 information throughout the species’                   as Landscape Conservation Design) are
                                                  better understand the factors                           range and continuing threats to the                   available to plan recovery actions at
                                                  influencing ingress and egress from                     species, we determined that the eastern               landscape scales, and to involve
                                                  hibernation. Preliminary results of that                massasauga rattlesnake is likely to                   multiple stakeholders in the planning
                                                  study indicate that emergence of eastern                become in danger of extinction                        process. After listing takes effect (see
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes from                            throughout its range within the                       DATES, above), the Service will
                                                  hibernation at sites throughout the range               foreseeable future, and thus are listing it           continue to work closely with State
                                                  is predictable based on rising subsurface               as a threatened species.                              conservation agencies, NGOs, and other
                                                  soil temperatures (King 2016, pers.                        (3) Comment: A State fish and                      willing partners to determine practical
                                                  comm.). In addition, regional weather                   wildlife management agency (PBFC), a                  and comprehensive conservation
                                                  stations maintained by the National                     State advisory group (Pennsylvania                    actions for the eastern massasauga
                                                  Oceanic and Atmospheric                                 Biological Survey), and several private               rattlesnake.
                                                  Administration (NOAA) monitor soil                      individuals commented that listing                      (6) Comment: A State fish and
                                                  temperatures at the strata crucial for                  would benefit the eastern massasauga                  wildlife management agency (PBFC)
                                                  predicting emergence. Near real-time                    rattlesnake by encouraging recovery                   stated that the loss of resiliency and
                                                  data generated at these weather stations                planning, surveys, outreach and                       redundancy across the species’ range
                                                  also are accessible to the public, and                  education to the public, and other                    within Pennsylvania leaves the eastern
                                                  when stations are located near extant                   rangewide conservation efforts.                       massasauga rattlesnake vulnerable and
                                                  populations of the eastern massasauga                      Our Response: After listing the                    with little adaptability to future changes
                                                  rattlesnake, these could be used by land                species, the Service will continue to                 in its environment. In addition, this
                                                  managers to determine whether                           work closely with State conservation                  commenter stated that, given the small
                                                  emergence from hibernation is near, and                 agencies, nongovernmental                             part of the eastern massasauga
                                                  thus whether burns should be avoided                    organizations (NGOs), and other willing               rattlesnake’s range that is represented in
                                                  for the remainder of the active season.                 partners throughout the range of the                  Pennsylvania, the conservation actions
                                                  As further analyses are completed and                   species to determine practical and                    undertaken within the State at these
                                                  the results of the study are made                       comprehensive actions and outreach to                 vulnerable, isolated sites are projected
                                                  available, we will work cooperatively                   conserve and recover the eastern                      to have little impact on the overall
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  with interested land managers to                        massasauga rattlesnake.                               persistence of the species without a
                                                  incorporate the results into useful burn                   (4) Comment: Two State fish and                    more comprehensive, regional
                                                  plans. Federal land management                          wildlife management agencies (PBFC                    approach.
                                                  agencies, such as the Forest Service, that              and Wisconsin Department of Natural                     Our Response: We agree that loss of
                                                  use prescribed fire to manage habitats                  Resources (WI DNR)) commented that                    redundancy and loss of resiliency across
                                                  occupied by the eastern massasauga                      the Service incorporated data and                     the range of the eastern massasauga
                                                  rattlesnake should consult with the                     comments provided by herpetologists                   rattlesnake are of concern. As stated in
                                                  Service as provided by section 7(a)(2) of               from the commenter’s staff on the SSA,                the SSA report for the eastern


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00112   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                       67203

                                                  massasauga rattlesnake, we used the                     persecution, unauthorized collection,                 prohibited under section 9 of the Act
                                                  genetic haplotypes identified by Ray et                 and trade; thus, designating critical                 unless permitted under section
                                                  al. (2013) as geographic analysis units.                habitat for the species is not prudent.               10(a)(1)(B) or section 7(a)(2) of the Act.
                                                  We found variation in resiliency and                    Designation of critical habitat requires              We will work with WI DNR to clarify
                                                  redundancy within and between the                       the publication of detailed maps and a                our respective roles and responsibilities
                                                  three analysis units (western analysis                  specific narrative description of critical            with respect to incidental take.
                                                  unit, central analysis unit, and eastern                habitat in the Federal Register, and                     (12) Comment: The Minnesota
                                                  analysis unit). While resiliency was                    these in turn often become available                  Department of Natural Resources (MN
                                                  lowest in the western analysis unit,                    through other media. We have                          DNR) confirmed that there are no
                                                  there was notably low resiliency in the                 determined that the publication of maps               verified records of eastern massasauga
                                                  central analysis unit and eastern                       and descriptions outlining the locations              rattlesnakes from within the State in the
                                                  analysis unit, especially along the                     of this species would further facilitate              past 50 years. They stated that because
                                                  southern edges, which includes                          unauthorized collection and trade, as                 of this lack of recent occurrence, they
                                                  populations in Pennsylvania (in the                     collectors would know the exact                       may request that the Service remove
                                                  eastern analysis unit). Following listing               locations where eastern massasauga                    Minnesota from the eastern massasauga
                                                  (see DATES, above), we will continue to                 rattlesnakes occur. Due to the threat of              rattlesnake’s current range.
                                                  work with our partners in State agencies                unauthorized collection and trade, a                     Our Response: During our evaluation
                                                  as well as with local agencies, NGOs,                   number of biologists working for State                of the species, we consulted with staff
                                                  and other interested parties to                         and local conservation agencies that                  from the MN DNR to assess the best
                                                  implement conservation measures for                     manage populations of eastern                         available information on the species’
                                                  this species. We agree that, whenever                   massasauga rattlesnakes also expressed                occurrence in the State. We thank the
                                                  possible, conservation measures                         to the Service serious concerns with                  commenter for providing additional
                                                  undertaken as part of comprehensive                     publishing maps and boundary                          information specific to surveys that led
                                                  regional plans have more value than                     descriptions of occupied habitat areas                to historical populations in Minnesota
                                                  actions taken on a site-by-site basis. In               that could be associated with critical                being considered likely extirpated. We
                                                  addition to recovery planning and other                 habitat designation (Redmer 2015, pers.               will consider a range of recovery actions
                                                  traditional tools, Landscape                            comm.).                                               following listing, and will work with
                                                  Conservation Design (LCD) may be an                        (9) Comment: A State fish and                      local and State partners to determine
                                                  option to help catalyze such regional                   wildlife management agency (WI DNR)                   and implement actions that would have
                                                  planning approaches for the eastern                     commented that they will continue to                  the most benefit to the species. We
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake.                                 encourage management of known                         concur that the best available
                                                     (7) Comment: A State fish and                        eastern massasauga rattlesnake sites to               information suggests that this species is
                                                  wildlife management agency (PBFC)                       address succession and other habitat                  likely extirpated from Minnesota, and
                                                  stated that, because of the species’                    concerns, and will continue to submit                 thus Minnesota is not considered part of
                                                  increasing isolation, habitat loss, and                 data and work collaboratively with the                the current range. However, the species
                                                  population decline, potential changes to                Service on eastern massasauga                         receives the protections of the Act
                                                  the landscape and site conditions would                 rattlesnake conservation.                             wherever found; thus, if the species
                                                  have a high risk of adversely affecting                    Our Response: We thank WI DNR for                  does occur in Minnesota in the future,
                                                  Pennsylvania’s eastern massasauga                       their shared interest in conservation                 it would be protected there.
                                                  rattlesnake population.                                 actions for the eastern massasauga                       (13) Comment: The MI DNR
                                                     Our Response: We agree that most of                  rattlesnake, and for stating their interest           recommended that, to address public
                                                  these factors present risks to the eastern              in continuing our partnership for                     safety concerns, the Service develop a
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake, and these                       conserving this species following                     rule under section 4(d) of the Act (a
                                                  factors were considered in the SSA for                  listing.                                              ‘‘4(d) rule’’) that would allow people to
                                                  the species. One exception was                             (10) Comment: WI DNR provided                      move the snakes from ‘‘high risk
                                                  isolation, which was not evaluated as a                 updated data on the status of the eastern             environments (for example, backyards,
                                                  direct stressor. While genetic isolation                massasauga rattlesnakes and their                     state campgrounds, schools) to areas
                                                  may operate as a stressor, our review of                conservation actions at two specific                  with low risk.’’ They further commented
                                                  the literature for the SSA provides                     sites.                                                that such a 4(d) rule would reduce
                                                  evidence that some high degree of                          Our Response: We thank WI DNR for                  persecution of the snakes.
                                                  genetic isolation in this species may be                their willingness to coordinate, for                     Our Response: We understand that
                                                  natural and pre-date European                           providing relevant data while we were                 the MI DNR receives several calls each
                                                  settlement; thus, isolation in and of                   preparing the SSA, and for providing                  year reporting an eastern massasauga
                                                  itself is not necessarily a stressor to the             additional information in their                       rattlesnake in or near a human dwelling
                                                  species.                                                comments. We have incorporated that                   and requesting assistance to remove it.
                                                     (8) Comment: Several commenters,                     additional information into our revised               A 4(d) rule, however, is not necessary to
                                                  including a State fish and wildlife                     SSA report.                                           provide for the relocation of snakes from
                                                  management agency (WI DNR),                                (11) Comment: WI DNR commented                     areas where people may be at risk of
                                                  provided statements supporting our                      that an additional conservation measure               bodily harm. Such an action, if done on
                                                  determination that designating critical                 for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake in             a good faith belief to protect a person
                                                  habitat for the eastern massasauga                      Wisconsin includes a broad incidental                 from bodily harm, is already provided
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  rattlesnake is not prudent due to the                   take permit/authorization for                         for under the Act without a 4(d) rule;
                                                  increased risks to the species if site                  management work conducted within                      see 16 U.S.C. 1540(a)(3) and 1540(b)(3).
                                                  locations are made publicly available.                  massasauga habitat (http://dnr.wi.gov/                This provision of the Act applies to all
                                                     Our Response: In the Critical Habitat                topic/ERReview/ItGrasslands.html).                    listed species.
                                                  section of this final rule, we have                        Our Response: When the listing                        We also note that non-harmful actions
                                                  determined that the designation of                      becomes effective (see DATES, above),                 to encourage eastern massasauga
                                                  critical habitat would increase the threat              any incidental take of eastern                        rattlesnakes to leave, stay off, or keep
                                                  to eastern massasauga rattlesnakes from                 massasauga rattlesnakes will be                       out of areas with frequent human use,


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00113   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67204            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  including a residence, yard, structure,                 bodily harm. Short-distance                           conservation needs of proposed or
                                                  sidewalk, road, trail, foot path, or                    translocation (moving from one location               candidate species, or species likely to
                                                  campground, would not result in take                    to another) of venomous snakes is a                   become candidates, before they become
                                                  and thus will not be prohibited. For                    common method used to reduce or                       listed as endangered or threatened.
                                                  example, homeowners may use a broom                     mitigate snake-human conflicts. In one                Landowners voluntarily commit to
                                                  or pole to move an eastern massasauga                   recent study, eastern massasauga                      conservation actions that will help
                                                  rattlesnake away from their property.                   rattlesnakes relocated 200 meters (656                stabilize or restore the species with the
                                                  When circumstances create an                            feet) from the capture point did not                  goal that if all other necessary
                                                  imminent threat to human safety, all                    exhibit abnormal movement or basking                  landowners did the same, listing would
                                                  forms of take of listed species (including              behavior and did not return to the                    become unnecessary. These agreements
                                                  harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,                      capture site (Harvey et al. 2014).                    encourage conservation actions for
                                                  wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect) are             Because the eastern massasauga                        species that are candidates for listing or
                                                  allowed to safeguard human safety. The                  rattlesnake is a venomous species, we                 are likely to become candidates.
                                                  Act’s implementing regulations (50 CFR                  advise due caution and encourage                      Although a single property owner’s
                                                  part 17) include a take exemption                       anyone wishing to move a snake to                     activities may not eliminate the need to
                                                  pursuant to the defense of human life                   contact an appropriate State or local                 list, conservation, if conducted by
                                                  (for threatened species, see 50 CFR                     agency for professional expertise in                  enough property owners throughout the
                                                  17.31, which incorporates provisions set                handling rattlesnakes. In addition, the               species’ range, can eliminate the need to
                                                  forth at 50 CFR 17.21(c)(2)): ‘‘any person              State or local landowner may have other               list. The agreements provide
                                                  may take endangered [or threatened]                     legal requirements that apply to                      landowners with assurances that their
                                                  wildlife in defense of his own life or the              handling wildlife. Therefore, when on                 conservation efforts will not result in
                                                  lives of others.’’) The regulations at 50               public lands, we encourage contacting                 future regulatory obligations in excess of
                                                  CFR 17.21(c)(4) require that any person                 the land manager to address the                       those they agree to at the time they enter
                                                  taking, including killing, listed wildlife              situation whenever feasible. However,                 into the agreement.
                                                  in defense of human life under this                     anyone may take necessary action at any                  After publication of the proposed rule
                                                  exception must notify our headquarters                  time to protect one’s self or another                 to list the eastern massasauga
                                                  Office of Law Enforcement, at the                       person from bodily harm.                              rattlesnake as a threatened species, the
                                                  address provided at 50 CFR 2.1(b), in                      (14) Comment: MI DNR provided a                    State of Michigan submitted to the
                                                  writing, within 5 days. In addition,                    Michigan Natural Features Inventory                   Service a CCAA that would provide for
                                                  section 11 of the Act enumerates the                    (MNFI) report with the most current                   management of eastern massasauga
                                                  penalties and enforcement of the Act. In                eastern massasauga rattlesnake data for               rattlesnakes on State-owned lands. The
                                                  regard to civil penalties, section 11(a)(3)             the State.                                            term of the CCAA and permit is 25
                                                                                                             Our Response: We thank MI DNR and                  years. The CCAA includes management
                                                  of the Act states, ‘‘Notwithstanding any
                                                                                                          MNFI for compiling and providing this                 strategies with conservation measures
                                                  other provision of this [Act], no civil
                                                                                                          additional information. MNFI is the                   designed to benefit eastern massasauga
                                                  penalty shall be imposed if it can be
                                                                                                          organization responsible for maintaining              rattlesnakes; these management
                                                  shown by a preponderance of the
                                                                                                          the Michigan Natural Heritage Database,               strategies will be implemented on
                                                  evidence that the defendant committed
                                                                                                          which includes known historical                       approximately 136,311 acres (55,263
                                                  an act based on a good faith belief that
                                                                                                          records for species of concern, including             hectares) of State-owned land.
                                                  he was acting to protect himself or
                                                                                                          the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, in                   Management strategies beneficial to
                                                  herself, a member of his or her family,
                                                                                                          Michigan. The database includes                       eastern massasauga rattlesnakes are
                                                  or any other individual from bodily                     records for populations of extirpated,                currently being implemented on many
                                                  harm, from any endangered or                            likely extirpated, unknown, and extant                sites on State-owned lands in Michigan,
                                                  threatened species’’ (16 U.S.C.                         status. During preparation of the SSA                 and are ongoing. The CCAA describes a
                                                  1540(a)(3)). Section 11(b)(3) of the Act                report, the Service worked closely with               program of continuing existing
                                                  contains similar language in regard to                  MNFI to ensure that the most current,                 management strategies beneficial to
                                                  criminal violations (see 16 U.S.C.                      available information from the Michigan               eastern massasauga rattlesnakes and
                                                  1540(b)(3)).                                            Natural Heritage Database on the status               reflects the current conditions analyzed
                                                     Eastern massasauga rattlesnakes                      of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake in              in the SSA. Existing conservation on
                                                  generally hibernate in wetlands, rather                 Michigan was included in our analyses.                State-owned lands in Michigan was
                                                  than in places occupied by people.                      This included new records that the                    accounted for in the SSA; the CCAA
                                                  However, in areas near wetlands or                      MNFI provided to us as late as                        does not provide detailed site-specific
                                                  uplands with natural habitat, eastern                   September 2015, after we had developed                information to alter that analysis. Thus,
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes occasionally                    the proposed listing rule. The report                 the CCAA does not alter the SSA results
                                                  find their way into areas of high human                 compiled by MNFI was added to our                     or projected population trends. While
                                                  use (for example, human-made                            records and used to further document                  the actions in the CCAA are expected to
                                                  structures, backyards, or campgrounds).                 our decision.                                         address some of the stressors on many
                                                  If an eastern massasauga rattlesnake is                    (15) Comment: MI DNR noted, as was                 sites on State-owned lands in Michigan,
                                                  encountered, it is best to not disturb it               mentioned in the SSA report, that they                the CCAA only covers a small part of
                                                  and to walk away from it. However, in                   are in the final stages of completing a               the species’ range; therefore, the
                                                  areas of high human use, other                          CCAA for the eastern massasauga                       conservation measures did not affect the
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  responses may be necessary to protect                   rattlesnake on MI DNR lands. They                     overall biological status of the species.
                                                  people from bodily harm. Eastern                        requested that the Service consider how                  (16) Comment: MI DNR questioned
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes observed in                     Michigan’s CCAA will address threats to               the Service’s use of three analysis units
                                                  areas of human use may subsequently                     the eastern massasauga on MI DNR                      to assess the species’ current conditions
                                                  conceal themselves as a natural defense                 lands in the final listing determination.             in the SSA, and how use of those three
                                                  mechanism and then later be                                Our Response: A CCAA is a formal                   units will affect recovery planning and,
                                                  unexpectedly encountered at close                       agreement between the Service and one                 ultimately, delisting. MI DNR expressed
                                                  range, presenting the possibility of                    or more parties to address the                        their opinion that recovery planning be


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00114   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                        67205

                                                  based on the species’ range and not the                 and thus its conservation status is of                allows flexibility for us to consider a
                                                  three analysis units.                                   concern there.                                        range of recovery actions following
                                                     Our Response: We identified and                         (18) Comment: NYDEC stated that the                listing, and we will work with local and
                                                  delineated the analysis units to assess                 two populations in the State occur on                 State partners to determine and
                                                  the historical, current, and future                     lands under conservation protection:                  implement actions that have the most
                                                  representation of the species.                          One is owned by a private conservation                benefit to the species.
                                                  Representation is an indicator of the                   organization, and the other is a State
                                                                                                          Wildlife Management Area. NYDEC                       Public Comments
                                                  ability of the species to respond to
                                                  physical (for example, habitat, climate)                further commented that it has been                       (20) Comment: An NGO (the Western
                                                  and biological (for example, new                        successful at managing for eastern                    Pennsylvania Conservancy (WPC))
                                                  diseases, predators, competitors)                       massasauga rattlesnakes at the State-                 commented that they continue to work
                                                  changes in its environment. The intent                  owned site, and believes that under                   closely with PBFC on eastern
                                                  of the analysis units is to capture the                 continued management, the species will                massasauga rattlesnake conservation
                                                  breadth of adaptive diversity (genotypic                continue to thrive at that site. Thus,                efforts, including implementation of the
                                                  (genetic makeup) and phenotypic                         NYDEC encourages the Service to                       Eastern Massasauga Species Action
                                                  (physical traits) diversity of the species).            endorse active habitat management                     Plan. In 2009–2010, habitat management
                                                  We evaluated available genetic and                      practices that promote habitat for the                plans were developed for eight private
                                                  ecological information to identify areas                species.                                              landowners in areas where eastern
                                                  of unique or differing genotypic and                       Our Response: The efforts of States                massasauga rattlesnakes are known to
                                                  phenotypic diversity. We did not find                   and other partners to benefit the eastern             occur. WPC has implemented some of
                                                  any compelling ecological differences,                  massasauga rattlesnake are important,                 the management plans with the help of
                                                                                                          and we agree that habitat management                  PBFC, the Pennsylvania Wildlife
                                                  but did find strong evidence of genetic
                                                                                                          activities to maintain appropriate                    Commission, and the Pennsylvania
                                                  variation across the range. Data indicate
                                                                                                          vegetative structure for the eastern                  Department of Conservation and Natural
                                                  that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake
                                                                                                          massasauga rattlesnake are crucial to its             Resources, including habitat restoration
                                                  shows high levels of genetic variation
                                                                                                          continued survival. However, certain                  activities funded by small foundation
                                                  (populations can be genetically
                                                                                                          management activities (for example,                   grants over the past 5 years.
                                                  distinguished from each other) at                                                                                Our Response: Following listing (see
                                                                                                          prescribed fire) are also known to be
                                                  regional and local scales. The synthesis
                                                                                                          important stressors to the species,                   DATES, above), we will continue to work
                                                  of this genetic data supports delineating,
                                                                                                          especially where population sizes are                 with our partners in State agencies as
                                                  on the basis of genetic differentiation,
                                                                                                          small or when timing of the                           well as with local agencies, NGOs, and
                                                  the three broad regions identified by
                                                                                                          management action increases risk (for                 other interested parties to implement
                                                  Ray et al. (2013, entire). Although
                                                                                                          example, just after snakes emerge from                conservation measures for this species.
                                                  several studies showed detectable
                                                                                                          hibernation). We will continue to work                Existing efforts to conserve the species
                                                  genetic differences among populations                   closely with our partners in State and                or local planning documents, like those
                                                  within these three broad areas, we did                  local agencies, NGOs, and any other                   mentioned by the commenter, will be
                                                  not have sufficient information to                      parties interested in conserving this                 valuable in developing regional or
                                                  delineate smaller-scale units. Thus, we                 species to investigate best management                rangewide recovery efforts.
                                                  assessed the distribution among and                     practices and the tradeoffs between                      (21) Comment: One commenter stated
                                                  within these three geographic units to                  management and potential mortality to                 that it is difficult to achieve on-the-
                                                  evaluate changes in eastern massasauga                  the rattlesnakes.                                     ground conservation and restoration for
                                                  rattlesnake representation from                            (19) Comment: NYDEC requested that                 the eastern massasauga rattlesnake and
                                                  historical condition to the present and                 the Service include a 4(d) rule to                    that land protection efforts are slow and
                                                  future. These analysis units were                       exempt some habitat management                        opportunities are limited.
                                                  identified for purposes of evaluating                   practices, such as woody vegetation                      Our Response: Limited resources are
                                                  representation in the SSA, and are not,                 removal, when conducted at a time and                 often a challenge in conservation.
                                                  at this point, intended to represent                    scale that makes adverse impacts to the               Following listing (see DATES, above), we
                                                  recovery units as might be identified                   eastern massasauga rattlesnake unlikely.              will continue to explore opportunities
                                                  during recovery planning. Any future                       Our Response: We agree that active                 to partner with State and local
                                                  recovery planning effort will use the                   habitat management for the eastern                    conservation agencies, NGOs, and other
                                                  best available information to promote                   massasauga rattlesnake will be crucial to             interested parties to leverage resources
                                                  the conservation and survival of the                    long-term maintenance and recovery of                 and find cooperative solutions to such
                                                  species.                                                existing populations. However, we                     challenges for the eastern massasauga
                                                     (17) Comment: The New York                           believe issuance of a 4(d) rule would not             rattlesnake.
                                                  Department of Environmental                             be required to allow such management                     (22) Comment: One commenter stated
                                                  Conservation (NYDEC) commented that                     activities for two reasons. First,                    that not all factors that may contribute
                                                  the species is listed as State endangered               management actions may take place on                  to the decline of the species were fully
                                                  in New York, and that due to the limited                a case-by-case basis, and we would like               explored in the SSA. In particular, the
                                                  range and vulnerability of populations,                 to learn more about how to lessen the                 commenter noted that, while the
                                                  the State does not anticipate delisting                 risk of eastern massasauga rattlesnake                proposed rule acknowledged climate
                                                  the species at any point in the future.                 mortality while still allowing                        change as a factor exacerbating the
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                     Our Response: We considered the                      appropriate habitat management to                     threats to this species, it did not provide
                                                  current status of the eastern massasauga                occur. Second, vegetation management                  a quantitative analysis of the impacts
                                                  rattlesnake in New York, as well as                     actions that take place at certain times              nor fully account for such uncertainty.
                                                  other States in the range of the eastern                of the year when the snakes are not                      Our Response: A recently published
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake, in the SSA. We                  active (for example, during winter when               climate change vulnerability analysis for
                                                  agree that the best available information               snakes are hibernating underground)                   the eastern massasauga rattlesnake
                                                  indicates that only two populations of                  would not affect the species and, thus,               (Pomara et al. 2015, entire) suggests that
                                                  this species occur in New York State,                   do not require a 4(d) rule. The Act                   populations in the southwestern parts of


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00115   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67206            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  the species’ range are extremely                           Our Response: Following listing of the                Our Response: While the eastern
                                                  vulnerable to climate change through                    eastern massasauga rattlesnake (see                   massasauga rattlesnake is a venomous
                                                  increasing intensity of winter drought                  DATES, above), regulatory provisions of               species, and we are aware that this is a
                                                  and increasing risks of summer floods.                  the Act will take effect. For example, the            reason some people may fear it, the
                                                  Populations in the eastern and central                  actions of Federal agencies that may                  species is considered to be among the
                                                  parts of the species’ range are vulnerable              affect the species will be subject to                 more shy and docile species of North
                                                  to climate variables, but to a lesser                   consultation with the Service as                      American rattlesnakes. Eastern
                                                  extent than the southwestern                            required under section 7(a)(2) of the                 massasauga rattlesnakes are known to
                                                  populations, and the northeastern                       Act. In doing so, the Service works with              eat voles, mice, other small mammals,
                                                  populations are least vulnerable to                     the action agencies to avoid or minimize              small birds, amphibians, and even other
                                                  climate change.                                         adverse effects to the species to ensure              species of snakes. Predatory birds (such
                                                     We acknowledged in the SSA report                    that the continued existence of the                   as hawks) and mammals (such as
                                                  that we believe our results                             species is not jeopardized. Also                      raccoons) are also known to prey on
                                                  underestimate the risks associated with                 following listing, we will work closely               eastern massasauga rattlesnakes. Thus,
                                                  climate change, especially in Indiana                   with our partners in Federal, State, and              they do have a function within
                                                  and Michigan. As we move forward                        local units of government, as well as                 ecosystems where they occur. Finally,
                                                  with recovery for the eastern                           NGOs and others with an interest in the               there are no provisions in the Act that
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake, we will more                    species, to identify and implement                    allow us to distinguish between species
                                                  fully investigate the effects of climate                proactive measures to conserve and                    that are popular and those that are
                                                  change and work towards buffering                       recover the species.                                  disliked. We used the best available
                                                  vulnerable populations.                                    (25) Comment: Several commenters                   scientific and commercial data to
                                                     (23) Comment: Several commenters                     stated that critical habitat should be                determine that the eastern massasauga
                                                  supported listing the eastern                           designated for the eastern massasauga                 rattlesnake warrants listing as a
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake. The comments                    rattlesnake. One of these commenters                  threatened species.
                                                  included statements such as:                            added that habitat is ‘‘critical to the                  (27) Comment: One commenter stated
                                                     • Resource development (natural gas                                                                        that public education will be an
                                                                                                          species’ survival’’ and habitat loss and
                                                  extraction and open pit mining for                                                                            important component of conservation
                                                                                                          degradation is the most significant
                                                  limestone, coal, and gravel) is a                                                                             for the eastern massasauga rattlesnake.
                                                                                                          threat to the species, and provided
                                                  significant threat to the species;                                                                               Our Response: We thank the
                                                                                                          information arguing that although
                                                     • Significant ongoing decline and                                                                          commenter and agree with this
                                                                                                          human persecution is a threat, and
                                                  multiple continuing threats throughout                                                                        statement. We are aware that, under rare
                                                                                                          human disturbance of the snakes did
                                                  the species’ range support listing;                                                                           circumstances, bites from a venomous
                                                     • Only small, isolated populations of                change the snakes’ behavior, no long-
                                                                                                                                                                snake, such as the eastern massasauga
                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake                      term effects were observed. They further
                                                                                                                                                                rattlesnake, could present some risk to
                                                  remain, and the species should be                       commented that increased risk of illegal              human health and safety. We are also
                                                  protected before further losses occur;                  collection or persecution could be                    aware that this is a reason why some
                                                  and                                                     addressed through education efforts.                  people fear the eastern massasauga
                                                     • It is important to preserve                           Our Response: We agree that outreach               rattlesnake. Since the species became a
                                                  biodiversity, so this species should be                 efforts will be important in addressing               candidate for listing in 1999, the Service
                                                  protected.                                              many topics related to conserving the                 has worked closely with our partners to
                                                     Our Response: We thank these                         eastern massasauga rattlesnake.                       provide outreach through producing or
                                                  commenters for their statements. When                   However, we determined that                           funding print and digital outreach
                                                  Congress passed the Act in 1973, it                     designation of critical habitat would                 materials, providing staff as speakers,
                                                  recognized that our rich natural heritage               increase persecution, unauthorized                    and also responding to questions from
                                                  is of ‘‘aesthetic, ecological, educational,             collection, and trade threats to the                  the media pertaining to this species.
                                                  recreational, and scientific value to our               eastern massasauga rattlesnake. The                   Following listing (see DATES, above),
                                                  Nation and its people.’’ It further                     eastern massasauga rattlesnake is highly              this need will not change, and it is our
                                                  expressed concern that many of our                      valued in the pet trade, and that value               intent to continue to work with partners
                                                  nation’s native plants and animals were                 is likely to increase as the species                  to ensure that current information on
                                                  in danger of becoming extinct. The                      becomes rarer. In addition, as a                      the role played by this species is
                                                  purpose of the Act is to protect and                    venomous species, it also is the target of            available to the public.
                                                  recover imperiled species and the                       persecution. Furthermore, States and                     (28) Comment: The Illinois Farm
                                                  ecosystems upon which they depend,                      other land managers have taken                        Bureau expressed concern that ‘‘certain
                                                  and thus plays a role in preserving                     measures to control and restrict                      pesticide use’’ was included in the
                                                  biodiversity.                                           information on the locations of the                   proposed rule as an activity that may
                                                     (24) Comment: One commenter stated                   eastern massasauga rattlesnake and to                 ‘‘result in a violation of section 9 of the
                                                  that, as an alternative to designating                  no longer make location and survey                    Act.’’ They stated that the SSA report
                                                  critical habitat, species protection could              information readily available to the                  does not provide supporting evidence
                                                  be improved by strengthening                            public. We have, therefore, determined                that pesticides are a stressor. They
                                                  environmental review for the eastern                    in accordance with 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)                requested that ‘‘certain pesticide use’’ be
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake by providing                     that it is not prudent to designate                   removed from the list of activities that
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  more information and adding more                        critical habitat for the eastern                      may result in a violation of section 9.
                                                  stringent requirements on those                         massasauga rattlesnake (see Critical                     Our Response: Based on this
                                                  conducting permitted activities. This                   Habitat, below, for a full discussion).               comment, we took a closer look at the
                                                  commenter recommended close                                (26) Comment: One commenter stated                 risk to the species associated with
                                                  coordination between Federal and State                  that a rattlesnake does not contribute                pesticide use and have removed
                                                  agencies to achieve the appropriate level               meaningfully to its ecosystem; thus, the              ‘‘certain pesticide use’’ from the list of
                                                  of environmental review and                             Service should focus on more important                activities that may result in a violation
                                                  management to conserve the species.                     and less loathsome species.                           of section 9 of the Act under the


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00116   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                       67207

                                                  Available Conservation Measures                         construction to routine transmission                  and implement actions that would have
                                                  section of this final rule. We included                 corridor maintenance, which could                     the most benefit to the species.
                                                  pesticide use in the original list of                   affect their ability to provide essential                (32) Comment: An individual reports
                                                  potential threats due to the potential for              services to millions of people. They                  having seen two eastern massasauga
                                                  impacts to populations of burrowing                     requested that, because maintenance                   rattlesnakes in New Brunswick, Canada,
                                                  crayfishes upon which the eastern                       and expansion of transmission corridors               but the commenter did not provide any
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake relies (by                       is beneficial to the conservation of the              documentation or supporting evidence.
                                                  hibernating in the burrows of these                     eastern massasauga rattlesnake (by                       Our Response: We considered the best
                                                  crayfish); however, this link is not                    managing succession), the Service                     available data, including historical
                                                  strongly substantiated. If additional                   consider a 4(d) rule specific to                      occurrences and the knowledge of local
                                                  supporting information is found that                    transmission corridors.                               species experts, in this listing
                                                  pesticides may pose a threat to the                        Our Response: While a number of                    determination. Because the eastern
                                                  burrowing crayfishes and the eastern                    populations of the eastern massasauga                 massasauga rattlesnake also occurs in
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake, we may again                    rattlesnake are considered to be extant               Canada, we coordinated with colleagues
                                                  recognize this in the future. We note                   in Pennsylvania and Ohio, many of                     from the responsible Federal (Parks
                                                  that any determination of whether an                    those populations occur in scattered                  Canada) and Provincial (Ontario
                                                  activity results in prohibited ‘‘take’’ of              locations. While the limits of the                    Ministry of Resources and Forestry)
                                                  an eastern massasauga rattlesnake is                    species’ range depicted on the map (see               governments in Canada in compiling
                                                  case-specific and independent of our                    Figure 1, above) give the appearance                  records used in our SSA. We are aware
                                                  discussion in the proposed or final                     that this species is widespread, many                 of no documented records of the eastern
                                                  listing rules.                                          actions that would be expected to affect              massasauga rattlesnake in New
                                                     (29) Comment: The Illinois Farm                      the species where it does occur may, in               Brunswick, and, as such, we do not
                                                  Bureau requested that, as an important                  reality, take place in areas where it does            consider this area to be part of the
                                                  stakeholder, they should be involved in                 not. In cases where proximity to a                    species’ historical range. If, however,
                                                  a ‘‘robust stakeholder engagement                       known location is uncertain, the                      the species is documented from
                                                  process’’ to develop best management                    commenter, or similar entities, can                   localities outside of the range as we
                                                  practices (BMPs) and avoidance                          contact the Service’s Ecological Services             currently understand it, we will update
                                                  measures that protect the eastern                       field offices for clarification and to                our records accordingly.
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake.                                 address specific issues related to their                 (33) Comment: One industry group
                                                     Our Response: Extant populations of                  needs. Also, in cases where an action is              urged the Service to endorse the
                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake are                  regulated or permitted by another                     integrated vegetation management (IVM)
                                                  now extremely rare in Illinois (perhaps                 Federal agency (for example the Federal               BMPs they implement, and expressed
                                                  fewer than six populations remaining),                  Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)),                 their strong belief that through close
                                                  and occur primarily on public                           consultation with the Service under                   coordination between the Service and
                                                  conservation lands. This, in turn, makes                section 7(a)(2) of the Act would also                 pipelines and utility companies
                                                  encounters with this species in Illinois                provide opportunities to determine best               utilizing IVM BMPs, they can help be
                                                  very rare. However, several core areas                  management practices in the event that                part of the solution towards restoring
                                                  occupied by the remaining Illinois                      the action may affect the species. There              populations of eastern massasauga
                                                  populations are adjacent to private                     are other provisions of the Act that                  rattlesnake.
                                                  lands that are in agricultural use.                     allow for the consideration of such                      Our Response: We thank the
                                                  Because of this, we believe it is                       management actions on a case-by-case                  commenter for their suggestion and look
                                                  important to remaining engaged with                     basis; thus issuance of a species-specific            forward to working collaboratively with
                                                  the Illinois Farm Bureau and potentially                4(d) rule is not appropriate.                         landowners and managers from the
                                                  affected private landowners as                             (31) Comment: A county government                  public, private, and industry sectors
                                                  stakeholders. We will also work closely                 agency (Forest Preserve District of Will              following listing. Also, while the eastern
                                                  to follow the lead of the Illinois                      County, Illinois) stated that their land              massasauga rattlesnake has a broad
                                                  Department of Natural Resources, which                  holdings include a now-extirpated                     geographic range, in many cases extant
                                                  has a successful track record of working                population of eastern massasauga                      populations occur in widely scattered
                                                  with private land owners (including                     rattlesnake and provided supporting                   locations. Thus, instances where
                                                  farmers) in areas where eastern                         information. They also stated that they               populations actually do occur close to
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes occur to                        hoped listing would allow additional                  certain project areas may actually be
                                                  increase awareness of the conservation                  conservation efforts and possible                     fairly limited. In cases where proximity
                                                  challenges faced by this species.                       reintroduction into previously occupied               to a known location is uncertain, the
                                                     (30) Comment: FirstEnergy                            lands.                                                commenter, or similar entities, can
                                                  commented that the eastern massasauga                      Our Response: We considered the best               contact the Service’s Ecological Services
                                                  rattlesnake is of interest to its 10                    available data, including historical                  field offices for clarification and to
                                                  operating companies, as populations                     occurrences and the knowledge of local                proactively address specific issues
                                                  occur in their service area. They further               species experts, in conducting our SSA,               related to their needs. Also, in cases
                                                  commented that they use integrated                      and we also considered the population                 where an action is authorized, funded,
                                                  vegetation management (IVM) to                          in Will County, Illinois, to be extirpated.           or carried out by another Federal agency
                                                  maintain grassland habitats within and                  We thank the commenter for providing                  (for example, FERC), consultation with
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  along transmission corridors, thus                      additional information specific to                    the Service under section 7(a)(2) of the
                                                  providing ideal habitat for species like                surveys that led to this location being               Act would also provide opportunities to
                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake.                     considered extirpated. We have                        determine best management practices in
                                                  They claimed that listing the eastern                   incorporated that additional information              the event that the action may affect the
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake could have                       into our revised SSA report. We will                  species.
                                                  significant impacts on their operations                 consider a range of recovery actions                     (34) Comment: One commenter stated
                                                  in Pennsylvania and Ohio, from                          following listing and will work with                  that fire management is an important
                                                  affecting new transmission line                         local and State partners to determine                 component of maintaining habitat for


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00117   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67208            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  the eastern massasauga rattlesnake.                     uses require actions (for example                     massasauga rattlesnakes from northeast
                                                  They further commented that prairie                     issuance of Federal permits) by other                 Iowa, indicating that snakes in the
                                                  species, like the eastern massasauga                    Federal agencies, section 7(a)(2) of the              sampled population are genetically
                                                  rattlesnake, are adapted to fire; thus, if              Act allows the action agency to consult               distinct from other eastern massasauga
                                                  fire is used appropriately, individuals                 with the Service to ensure that the                   rattlesnake populations. Those data
                                                  can easily move to safety and very few                  action will not jeopardize listed species.            indicate that snakes in this population
                                                  will be killed.                                            (36) Comment: One commenter                        are of hybrid origin consisting of a
                                                     Our Response: As stated in our                       specified that it is imperative to keep               mixture of approximately 80 percent
                                                  response to Comment 1, above, we agree                  people safe on public lands. Thus, they               genetic markers specific to the eastern
                                                  that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake                 recommended that the State natural                    massasauga rattlesnake and 20 percent
                                                  is a species that occurs primarily within               resource agencies have the clear ability              genetic markers specific to the western
                                                  habitats that are dependent on periodic                 to remove snakes from areas where there               massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus
                                                  fires to maintain appropriate vegetative                is a high likelihood the snakes will                  tergeminus). The commenter further
                                                  structure. Suppression of wildfires                     come into contact with people. Another                stated that modeling indicates that they
                                                  following European settlement has                       commenter stated that the eastern                     originated through a historical
                                                  allowed degradation of many such plant                  massasauga rattlesnake poses a risk to                hybridization event between these
                                                  communities through succession by                       livestock and pets in the summer                      species within the last 10,000 years,
                                                  woody vegetation, and land managers                     months when the snakes are sunning                    likely as a result of shifting species
                                                  often use prescribed fire as a                          themselves on roads, field edges, lawns,              distributions due to post-glacial
                                                  management technique to maintain                        and rock piles. A third commenter                     environmental effects. The commenter
                                                  these communities so that woody                         added that listing the eastern                        stated that the conservation status of
                                                  canopies are not established. However,                  massasauga rattlesnake will not protect               these northeast Iowa populations should
                                                  because many of the remaining                           it, as people who feel threatened by the              be assessed.
                                                  populations of the eastern massasauga                   snakes will continue to kill them and                    Our Response: We appreciate the
                                                  rattlesnake are already small, and                      will not report it.                                   information provided on the emerging
                                                  vulnerable to loss of individuals (Faust                   Our Response: The Act includes                     science on genetics and taxonomy of
                                                  et al. 2011, pp. 59–60; Seigel and Shiel                provisions to allow flexibility to remove             eastern massasauga rattlesnakes. We
                                                  1999, pp. 19–20), mortality resulting                   individual snakes from situations where               hope to continue the close working
                                                  from prescribed fire was one of the most                they present a risk to human health or                relationship with the commenter as the
                                                  prominent stressors identified by Faust                 safety. These provisions include the                  science advances. The data on genetic
                                                  et al. (2011, pp. 12–16) and in the SSA.                potential for both lethal and nonlethal               haplotypes described by Ray et al.
                                                  Please refer to our response to Comment                 take, and the situations in which these               (2013, entire) have been peer-reviewed
                                                  1, above, for more details regarding the                options are permissible are discussed                 and published. Furthermore, these
                                                  use of prescribed fire.                                 above under our response to Comment                   haplotypes are current recognized by
                                                     (35) Comment: One commenter                          13. We also note that non-harmful                     the American Zoological Association in
                                                  recommended that the Service not issue                  actions to encourage eastern massasauga               managing their captive populations.
                                                  any rules that would impinge upon the                   rattlesnakes to leave, stay off, or keep              Thus, we used the genetic haplotypes of
                                                  private property rights of individual                   out of areas with frequent human use,                 Ray et al. (2013, entire) to delineate our
                                                  citizens on non-public lands. They                      including a residence, yard, structure,               analysis units into a western analysis
                                                  further stated that there is no need to set             sidewalk, road, trail, foot path, or                  unit, a central analysis unit, and an
                                                  aside specific lands or take private                    campground, would not result in take                  eastern analysis unit. We understand
                                                  property to benefit this species, and that              and thus are not prohibited. For                      that the commenter is also researching
                                                  private landowners should only be                       example, maintenance of mowed lawn                    this topic and has stated intent to
                                                  required to participate on a voluntary                  in areas of regular human use to                      publish it in a peer-reviewed journal.
                                                  basis.                                                  discourage eastern massasauga                         The Act requires us to use the best
                                                     Our Response: The Service works                      rattlesnakes from entering these areas is             available data in decision making, and
                                                  proactively with private landowners                     acceptable.                                           we hope to continue the close working
                                                  who want to voluntarily take measures                      (37) Comment: One commenter stated                 relationship with the commenter as the
                                                  to help conserve listed species on their                that Sistrurus catenatus populations                  genetic science on the species advances.
                                                  property. We do not take private lands                  east of the Mississippi are divided into                 With regard to the detection of
                                                  to benefit listed species. In cases where               two genetic units: a ‘‘western’’ unit                 possible past hybridization in the Iowa
                                                  we acquire lands (for example, through                  consisting of individuals from                        population, we thank this commenter
                                                  fee-simple purchase, or through                         populations in Illinois and Wisconsin                 for providing new information. Since
                                                  providing funding to our partners in                    and an ‘‘eastern’’ unit consisting of all             this comment was submitted, we have
                                                  State and local government, or to NGOs)                 other populations. The commenter                      discussed this topic further with the
                                                  to benefit listed species, it is the                    stated that these populations are weakly              commenter. Because the population in
                                                  Service’s policy that purchases be made                 phylogenetically distinct from each                   question is comprised primarily of
                                                  from willing sellers, and that fair market              other and historical modeling suggests                genetic markers of the eastern
                                                  price be paid. In cases where private                   that eastern populations are derived                  massasauga rattlesnake, we still
                                                  landowners propose legal activities or                  from western populations through a                    consider the northeast Iowa individuals
                                                  uses of their lands that may lead to                    post-glacial colonization process. The                to be eastern massasauga rattlesnakes.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  incidental take of listed species, the Act              ‘‘western’’ unit is roughly comparable to                (38) Comment: The Nature
                                                  provides for mechanisms (such as                        the ‘‘western’’ unit proposed by Ray et               Conservancy’s Indiana Office provided
                                                  habitat conservation plans) that allow                  al. (2013, entire), while the ‘‘eastern’’             an overview of the status of eastern
                                                  interested parties to find collaborative                unit is consistent with the ‘‘central and             massasauga rattlesnake populations at
                                                  ways to minimize and mitigate impacts                   eastern’’ units proposed by Ray et al.                sites they own in Indiana and that
                                                  to the species while still allowing them                (2013, entire). The same commenter                    historically supported the species.
                                                  to proceed with their proposed                          provided data based on genetic analysis                  Our Response: We thank the
                                                  activities. Similarly, if proposed land                 of tissue samples from eastern                        commenter for providing additional


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00118   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                       67209

                                                  information on the historical occurrence                is more prevalent than MI DNR or the                  and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the
                                                  of the eastern massasauga rattlesnake on                Service estimate and that the species is              Act, we may list a species based on: (A)
                                                  their land holdings, and we have added                  common in northern Michigan.                          The present or threatened destruction,
                                                  it to information gathered from the                        Our Response: It is widely recognized              modification, or curtailment of its
                                                  Natural Heritage Database as provided                   that Michigan still harbors a greater                 habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
                                                  by the Indiana Department of Natural                    number of extant populations of the                   commercial, recreational, scientific, or
                                                  Resources so that it may augment our                    eastern massasauga rattlesnake than any               educational purposes; (C) disease or
                                                  data on the species.                                    of the other nine States and the one                  predation; (D) the inadequacy of
                                                     (39) Comment: One commenter stated                   Canadian Province where the species                   existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E)
                                                  that there is no evidence that the eastern              occurred historically. We coordinated                 other natural or manmade factors
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake existed in                       with our partner State fish and wildlife              affecting its continued existence. Listing
                                                  Missouri, and that populations in                       agencies, consulted the most current                  actions may be warranted based on any
                                                  eastern Missouri should be considered                   information from Natural Heritage                     of the above threat factors, singly or in
                                                  as western massasauga rattlesnakes, a                   Databases, and solicited information                  combination.
                                                  different species. The commenter stated                 from species experts for each State and                  We have carefully assessed the best
                                                  that populations of the eastern                         for Ontario to compile the most current               scientific and commercial data available
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes occurring east                  data on the species. In addition to these             regarding the past, present, and
                                                  of the Mississippi River warrant                        scientific sources, we sought out public              predicted future condition of the eastern
                                                  protection.                                             comment and data through the proposed                 massasauga rattlesnake and how threats
                                                     Our Response: In evaluating the                      listing rule’s public comment period. In              are affecting the species now and into
                                                  taxonomy and distribution of the                        Michigan specifically, MNFI houses the                the future. The species faces an array of
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake, we                      Natural Heritage Database; they, among                threats that have and will likely
                                                  considered the best available scientific                others, provided input on the Michigan                continue (often increasingly) to
                                                  information (see pages 8–9 of the SSA                   populations. Based on these data,                     contribute to declines at all levels
                                                  report). While recent genetic studies                   historically and currently, Michigan                  (individual, population, and species).
                                                  showed that extant populations in                       harbors a greater number of extant                    The loss of habitat was historically, and
                                                  central and northwestern Missouri                       populations than any of the other nine                continues to be, the threat with greatest
                                                  belong to the western massasauga                        States and Ontario. There are 259                     impact to the species (Factor A), either
                                                  rattlesnake (Sistrurus tergeminus), no                  known populations of eastern                          through development or through
                                                  useful tissues from snakes in extreme                   massasauga rattlesnake in Michigan;                   changes in habitat structure due to
                                                  eastern Missouri (St. Louis and Warren                  this is 46 percent of all known                       vegetative succession. Disease, new or
                                                  Counties) were available to the                         populations rangewide. Of these, 158                  increasingly prevalent, is another
                                                  researchers for inclusion in the genetic                (61 percent) are believed to persist today            emerging and potentially catastrophic
                                                  studies because those populations are                   and another 47 have unknown status;                   threat to eastern massasauga rattlesnake
                                                  likely extirpated. This was confirmed                   the Michigan populations represent 59                 populations (Factor C) that is likely to
                                                  during coordination between the                         percent of all known extant populations               affect the species in the foreseeable
                                                  Service and the responsible State fish                  rangewide. Thus, compared to other                    future. As population sizes decrease,
                                                  and wildlife management agency                          localities, the eastern massasauga                    localized impacts, such as collection
                                                  (Missouri Department of Conservation).                  rattlesnake was historically and                      and persecution of individuals, also
                                                  However, published studies on                           continues to be more prevalent in                     increases the risk of extinction (Factor
                                                  phenotypic variation (especially color                  Michigan than in any other State. We                  B). These stressors are chronic and are
                                                  pattern) of massasauga rattlesnakes from                acknowledge that there may still be                   expected to continue with a similar
                                                  throughout Missouri—including the                       some undocumented populations                         magnitude of impact into the future.
                                                  historical, but now likely extirpated                   remaining, especially in Michigan. We                 Additionally, this species is vulnerable
                                                  populations in extreme eastern                          recommend that individuals with                       to the effects of climate change through
                                                  Missouri—indicate that the latter                       specific knowledge of populations                     increasing intensity of winter droughts
                                                  populations could be phenotypically                     contact MNFI to ensure the locations of               and increasing risk of summer floods
                                                  included within the eastern massasauga                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake are                    (Factor E), particularly in the
                                                  rattlesnake. Recently extirpated,                       known.                                                southwestern part of its range (Pomera
                                                  historical populations of the eastern                      (41) Comment: Several commenters                   et al. undated, unpaginated; Pomera et
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake were known                       stated that the species should be listed              al. 2014, pp. 95–97).
                                                  from the adjacent part of Illinois, less                as endangered rather than threatened,                    Some conservation actions (for
                                                  than 19 miles (30 kilometers) from the                  but did not provide further rationale or              example, management of invasive
                                                  historical eastern Missouri populations.                new evidence in support of this                       species and woody plant encroachment,
                                                  In addition, genetic studies of                         recommendation.                                       timing prescribed fires to avoid the
                                                  massasauga rattlesnakes in Iowa                            Our Response: For reasons discussed                active season) are currently in place,
                                                  indicate that the eastern massasauga                    in the Determination section of this final            and provide protection and
                                                  genotype is present there (though these                 rule, the Service has determined that the             enhancement to some eastern
                                                  are also of likely past hybridization),                 eastern massasauga rattlesnake meets                  massasauga rattlesnake populations (see
                                                  well west of the Mississippi River. In                  the Act’s definition of a threatened                  pp. 43–45 in the SSA report for a full
                                                  the absence of better information on the                species, rather than an endangered                    discussion). However, our analysis
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  taxonomic identity of the likely                        species.                                              projects that eastern massasauga
                                                  extirpated massasauga populations in                                                                          rattlesnake populations will continue to
                                                  extreme eastern Missouri, we have                       Determination                                         decline even if current conservation
                                                  included those populations within the                     Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),              measures are continued into the future.
                                                  historical range of the eastern                         and its implementing regulations at 50                As a result of these factors, the number
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake.                                 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures                and health of eastern massasauga
                                                     (40) Comment: One commenter stated                   for adding species to the Federal Lists               rattlesnake populations are anticipated
                                                  that the eastern massasauga rattlesnake                 of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife                 to decline across the species’ range,


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00119   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67210            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  particularly in the southwestern                        50 years, the current threats are still               still exist, and we anticipate they will
                                                  portions of the range, where large losses               reliably foreseeable at the end of that               remain self-sustaining.
                                                  relative to historical conditions have                  time span based on models, available                     The SSA results likely represent an
                                                  already occurred.                                       information on threats impacting the                  overly optimistic scenario for this
                                                     Further, the reductions in eastern                   species, and other analyses; however,                 species (see pp. 87–88 of the SSA report
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake population                       we cannot reasonably predict future                   for a list of assumptions and their
                                                  numbers, distribution, and health                       conditions for the species beyond 50                  expected effect). For example, the
                                                  forecast in the SSA report likely                       years. Our uncertainty in forecasting the             analysis treated populations of
                                                  represent an overly optimistic scenario                 status of the species beyond 50 years is              unknown status as if they were all
                                                  for the species, and future outcomes                    also increased by our methodology of                  extant, likely resulting in an
                                                  may be worse than predicted. Because                    extrapolating from a subset of modeled                overestimate of species’ viability. Thus,
                                                  of the type of information available to                 populations to all extant or potentially              we considered whether treating the
                                                  us, the quantitative analysis assumes                   extant populations.                                   populations with an ‘‘unknown’’ status
                                                  that threat magnitude and pervasiveness                    We find that the eastern massasauga                as currently extant in the analysis had
                                                  remain constant into the future, but it is              rattlesnake is likely to become                       an effect on the status determination.
                                                  more likely that the magnitude of                       endangered throughout its entire range                We examined whether the number of
                                                  threats will increase into the future                   within the foreseeable future based on                self-sustaining populations would
                                                  throughout the range of the species (for                the severity and pervasiveness of threats             change significantly over time if we
                                                  example, the frequency of drought and                   currently impacting the species, the                  instead assumed that all populations
                                                  flooding events are likely to increase) or              projected loss of populations rangewide               with an ‘‘unknown’’ status were
                                                  that novel threats (for example, new                    (loss of resiliency and redundancy), and              extirpated. The results are a more severe
                                                  pathogens) may arise. In addition, some                 the projected loss of its distribution                projected decline in the eastern
                                                  currently identified threats are not                    within large portions of its range. This              massasauga rattlesnake’s status than our
                                                  included in the quantitative analysis                   loss in distribution could represent a                analysis projects when we assign the
                                                  (for example, disease, road mortality,                  loss of genetic and ecological adaptive               unknown status populations to the
                                                  persecution/collection, and impacts                     diversity, as well as a loss of                       ‘‘extant’’ category, but not to the extent
                                                  from climate change), because we lack                   populations from parts of the range that              that we would determine the species to
                                                  specific, quantitative information on                   may provide future refugia in a                       be currently in danger of extinction.
                                                  how these factors may affect the species                changing climate. Furthermore, many of                   Under the Act and our implementing
                                                  in the future. These factors and their                                                                        regulations, a species may warrant
                                                                                                          the currently extant populations are
                                                  potential effects on the eastern                                                                              listing if it is in danger of extinction or
                                                                                                          experiencing high magnitude threats.
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake were discussed                                                                         is likely to become so throughout all or
                                                                                                          Although these high magnitude threats
                                                  and considered qualitatively as part of                                                                       a significant portion of its range.
                                                                                                          are not currently pervasive rangewide,
                                                  the determination.                                                                                            Because we have determined that the
                                                     The species’ viability is also affected              they are likely to become pervasive in
                                                                                                          the foreseeable future as they expand                 eastern massasauga rattlesnake is likely
                                                  by losses of populations from historical                                                                      to become in danger of extinction
                                                  portions of its range, which may have                   and impact additional populations
                                                                                                          throughout the species’ range.                        within the foreseeable future throughout
                                                  represented unique genetic and                                                                                all of its range, no portion of its range
                                                  ecological diversity. The species is                    Therefore, on the basis of the best
                                                                                                          available scientific and commercial                   can be ‘‘significant’’ for purposes of the
                                                  extirpated from Minnesota and
                                                                                                          data, we determine that the eastern                   definitions of ‘‘endangered species’’ and
                                                  Missouri, and many populations have
                                                                                                          massasauga rattlesnake is likely to                   ‘‘threatened species.’’ See the Final
                                                  been lost in the western part of the
                                                                                                          become an endangered species within                   Policy on Interpretation of the Phrase
                                                  species’ range. Rangewide, the extent of
                                                                                                          the foreseeable future throughout all of              ‘‘Significant Portion of Its Range’’ in the
                                                  occurrence is predicted to decline by 80
                                                                                                          its range, and, thus, we are listing it as            Endangered Species Act’s Definitions of
                                                  percent by year 50. Actual losses in
                                                                                                          a threatened species in accordance with               ‘‘Endangered Species’’ and ‘‘Threatened
                                                  extent of occurrence will likely be
                                                                                                          sections 3(20) and 4(a)(1) of the Act.                Species’’ (79 FR 37578; July 1, 2014).
                                                  greater than estimated because of the
                                                  methodology used in our analysis, as                       We find that an endangered species                 Critical Habitat
                                                  discussed above.                                        status is not appropriate for the eastern
                                                     The Act defines an endangered                        massasauga rattlesnake. In assessing                  Background
                                                  species as any species that is ‘‘in danger              whether the species is in danger of                     Critical habitat is defined in section 3
                                                  of extinction throughout all or a                       extinction, we used the plain language                of the Act as:
                                                  significant portion of its range’’ and a                understanding of this phrase as meaning                 (1) The specific areas within the
                                                  threatened species as any species that is               ‘‘presently in danger of extinction.’’ We             geographical area occupied by the
                                                  ‘‘likely to become an endangered                        considered whether extinction is a                    species, at the time it is listed in
                                                  species within the foreseeable future                   plausible condition as the result of the              accordance with the Act, on which are
                                                  throughout all or a significant portion of              established, present condition of the                 found those physical or biological
                                                  its range.’’ A key statutory difference                 eastern massasauga rattlesnake. Based                 features:
                                                  between an endangered species and a                     on the species’ present condition, we                   (a) Essential to the conservation of the
                                                  threatened species is the timing of when                find that the species is not currently in             species, and
                                                  a species may be in danger of extinction,               danger of extinction. The timeframe for                 (b) Which may require special
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  either now (endangered species) or in                   conditions that render the species to be              management considerations or
                                                  the foreseeable future (threatened                      in danger of extinction is beyond the                 protection; and
                                                  species). Based on the biology of the                   present. While the magnitude of threats                 (2) Specific areas outside the
                                                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake and the                  affecting populations is high, threats are            geographical area occupied by the
                                                  degree of uncertainty of future                         not acting at all sites at a sufficient               species at the time it is listed, upon a
                                                  predictions, we find that the                           magnitude to result in the species                    determination that such areas are
                                                  ‘‘foreseeable future’’ for the species is               presently being in danger of extinction.              essential for the conservation of the
                                                  best defined as 50 years. Forecasting to                Additionally, some robust populations                 species.


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00120   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                       67211

                                                     Our regulations at 50 CFR 424.02                     are included in a critical habitat                    Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R.
                                                  define the geographical area occupied                   designation if they contain physical or               5658)), and our associated Information
                                                  by the species as: An area that may                     biological features (1) which are                     Quality Guidelines, provide criteria,
                                                  generally be delineated around species’                 essential to the conservation of the                  establish procedures, and provide
                                                  occurrences, as determined by the                       species and (2) which may require                     guidance to ensure that our decisions
                                                  Secretary (i.e., range). Such areas may                 special management considerations or                  are based on the best scientific data
                                                  include those areas used throughout all                 protection. For these areas, critical                 available. For example, they require our
                                                  or part of the species’ life cycle, even if             habitat designations identify, to the                 biologists, to the extent consistent with
                                                  not used on a regular basis (for example,               extent known using the best scientific                the Act and with the use of the best
                                                  migratory corridors, seasonal habitats,                 and commercial data available, those                  scientific data available, to use primary
                                                  and habitats used periodically, but not                 physical or biological features that are              and original sources of information as
                                                  solely by vagrant individuals).                         essential to the conservation of the                  the basis for recommendations to
                                                     Conservation, as defined under                       species (such as space, food, cover, and              designate critical habitat.
                                                  section 3 of the Act, means to use, and                 protected habitat). In identifying those                 When we are determining which areas
                                                  the use of, all methods and procedures                  physical or biological features, we focus             should be designated as critical habitat,
                                                  that are necessary to bring an                          on the specific features that support the             our primary source of information is
                                                  endangered or threatened species to the                 life-history needs of the species,                    generally the information from the SSA
                                                  point at which the measures provided                    including but not limited to, water                   and information developed during the
                                                  pursuant to the Act are no longer                       characteristics, soil type, geological                listing process for the species.
                                                  necessary. Such methods and                             features, prey, vegetation, symbiotic                 Additional information sources may
                                                  procedures include, but are not limited                 species, or other features. A feature may             include any generalized conservation
                                                  to, all activities associated with                      be a single habitat characteristic, or a              strategy, criteria, or outline that may
                                                  scientific resources management such as                 more complex combination of habitat                   have been developed for the species, the
                                                  research, census, law enforcement,                      characteristics. Features may include                 recovery plan for the species, articles in
                                                  habitat acquisition and maintenance,                    habitat characteristics that support                  peer-reviewed journals, conservation
                                                  propagation, live trapping, and                         ephemeral or dynamic habitat                          plans developed by States and counties,
                                                  transplantation, and, in the                            conditions. Features may also be                      scientific status surveys and studies,
                                                  extraordinary case where population                     expressed in terms relating to principles             biological assessments, other
                                                  pressures within a given ecosystem                      of conservation biology, such as patch                unpublished materials, or experts’
                                                  cannot be otherwise relieved, may                       size, distribution distances, and                     opinions or personal knowledge.
                                                  include regulated taking.                               connectivity.                                            Habitat is dynamic, and species may
                                                     Critical habitat receives protection                    Under the second prong of the Act’s                move from one area to another over
                                                  under section 7 of the Act through the                  definition of critical habitat, we can                time. We recognize that critical habitat
                                                  requirement that Federal agencies                       designate critical habitat in areas                   designated at a particular point in time
                                                  ensure, in consultation with the Service,               outside the geographical area occupied                may not include all of the habitat areas
                                                  that any action they authorize, fund, or                by the species at the time it is listed if            that we may later determine are
                                                  carry out is not likely to result in the                we determine that such areas are                      necessary for the recovery of the
                                                  destruction or adverse modification of                  essential for the conservation of the                 species. For these reasons, a critical
                                                  critical habitat. The designation of                    species. We will determine whether                    habitat designation does not signal that
                                                  critical habitat does not affect land                   unoccupied areas are essential for the                habitat outside the designated area is
                                                  ownership or establish a refuge,                        conservation of the species by                        unimportant or may not be needed for
                                                  wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other                 considering the life-history, status, and             recovery of the species. Areas that are
                                                  conservation area. Critical habitat                     conservation needs of the species. This               important to the conservation of the
                                                  designation does not allow the                          will be further informed by any                       species, both inside and outside the
                                                  government or public to access private                  generalized conservation strategy,                    critical habitat designation, will
                                                  lands, nor does it require                              criteria, or outline that may have been               continue to be subject to: (1)
                                                  implementation of restoration, recovery,                developed for the species to provide a                Conservation actions implemented
                                                  or enhancement measures by non-                         substantive foundation for identifying                under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2)
                                                  Federal landowners. Where a landowner                   which features and specific areas are                 regulatory protections afforded by the
                                                  requests Federal agency funding or                      essential to the conservation of the                  requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
                                                  authorization for an action that may                    species and, as a result, the                         for Federal agencies to ensure their
                                                  affect a listed species or critical habitat,            development of the critical habitat                   actions are not likely to jeopardize the
                                                  the Federal agency would be required to                 designation. For example, an area                     continued existence of any endangered
                                                  consult with the Service under section                  currently occupied by the species but                 or threatened species, and (3) section 9
                                                  7(a)(2) of the Act, but even if                         that was not occupied at the time of                  of the Act’s prohibitions on taking any
                                                  consultation leads to a finding that the                listing may be essential to the                       individual of the species, including
                                                  action would likely cause destruction or                conservation of the species and may be                taking caused by actions that affect
                                                  adverse modification of critical habitat,               included in the critical habitat                      habitat. Federally funded or permitted
                                                  the resulting obligation of the Federal                 designation.                                          projects affecting listed species outside
                                                  action agency and the landowner is not                     Section 4 of the Act requires that we              their designated critical habitat areas
                                                  to restore or recover the species, but                  designate critical habitat on the basis of            may still result in jeopardy findings in
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  rather to implement reasonable and                      the best scientific data available.                   some cases. These protections and
                                                  prudent alternatives to avoid                           Further, our Policy on Information                    conservation tools will continue to
                                                  destruction or adverse modification of                  Standards Under the Endangered                        contribute to recovery of this species.
                                                  critical habitat.                                       Species Act (published in the Federal                 Similarly, critical habitat designations
                                                     Under the first prong of the Act’s                   Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)),              made on the basis of the best available
                                                  definition of critical habitat, areas                   the Information Quality Act (section 515              information at the time of designation
                                                  within the geographical area occupied                   of the Treasury and General                           will not control the direction and
                                                  by the species at the time it was listed                Government Appropriations Act for                     substance of future recovery plans,


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00121   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67212            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or                   in Canada and smuggled into the United                that could be associated with critical
                                                  other species conservation planning                     States, most destined for the pet trade               habitat designation (Redmer 2015, pers.
                                                  efforts if new information available at                 (Thomas 2010, unpaginated). Snakes in                 comm.). Designating critical habitat
                                                  the time of these planning efforts calls                general are known to be feared and                    could negate the efforts of State and
                                                  for a different outcome.                                persecuted by people, and venomous                    local conservation agencies to restrict
                                                                                                          species even more so (Ohman and                       access to location information that
                                                  Prudency Determination
                                                                                                          Mineka 2003, p. 7; Whitaker and Shine                 could significantly affect future efforts
                                                     Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as                       2000, p. 121). As a venomous snake, the               to control the threat of unauthorized
                                                  amended, and implementing regulations                   eastern massasauga rattlesnake is no                  collection and trade and persecution of
                                                  (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the                   exception, with examples of roundups                  eastern massasauga rattlesnakes.
                                                  maximum extent prudent and                              or bounties for them persisting through
                                                  determinable, we designate critical                                                                           Summary of Prudency Determination
                                                                                                          the mid-1900s (Bushey 1985, p. 10; Vogt
                                                  habitat at the time the species is                      1981; Wheeling, IL, Historical Society                   We have determined that designating
                                                  determined to be an endangered or                       Web site accessed 2015), and more                     critical habitat for the eastern
                                                  threatened species. Our regulations (50                                                                       massasauga rattlesnake is not prudent.
                                                                                                          recent examples of persecution in
                                                  CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state that the                                                                              Designation of critical habitat would
                                                                                                          Pennsylvania (Jellen 2005, p. 11) and
                                                  designation of critical habitat is not                                                                        increase the threats to the eastern
                                                                                                          Michigan (Baily et al. 2011, p. 171). The
                                                  prudent when one or both of the                                                                               massasauga rattlesnake from
                                                                                                          process of designating critical habitat
                                                  following situations exist:                                                                                   persecution and unauthorized collection
                                                     (1) The species is threatened by taking              would increase human threats to the
                                                                                                                                                                and trade. A limited number of U.S.
                                                  or other human activity, and                            eastern massasauga rattlesnake by                     species listed under the Act have
                                                  identification of critical habitat can be               increasing the vulnerability of this                  commercial value in trade. The eastern
                                                  expected to increase the degree of threat               species to unauthorized collection and                massasauga rattlesnake is one of them.
                                                  to the species, or                                      trade, or to persecution, through public              Due to the market demand and
                                                     (2) Such designation of critical habitat             disclosure of its locations. Designation              willingness of individuals to collect
                                                  would not be beneficial to the species.                 of critical habitat requires the                      eastern massasauga rattlesnakes without
                                                     In determining whether a designation                 publication of maps and a specific                    authorization, and the willingness of
                                                  would not be beneficial, the factors the                narrative description of critical habitat             others to kill them out of fear or wanton
                                                  Service may consider include but are                    in the Federal Register. The degree of                dislike, we have determined that any
                                                  not limited to: Whether the present or                  detail in those maps and boundary                     action that publicly discloses the
                                                  threatened destruction, modification, or                descriptions is far greater than the                  location of eastern massasauga
                                                  curtailment of a species’ habitat or range              general location descriptions provided                rattlesnakes (such as critical habitat)
                                                  is not a threat to the species, or whether              in this final rule to list the species as a           puts the species in further peril. Many
                                                  any areas meet the definition of ‘‘critical             threatened species. Furthermore, a                    populations of the eastern massasauga
                                                  habitat.’’ In our proposed listing rule,                critical habitat designation normally                 rattlesnake are small, and the life
                                                  we determined that both of the above                    results in the news media publishing                  history of the species makes it
                                                  circumstances applied to the eastern                    articles in local newspapers and special              vulnerable to additive loss of
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake. However, under                  interest Web sites, usually with maps of              individuals (for example, loss of
                                                  our updated critical habitat regulations                the critical habitat. We have determined              reproductive adults in numbers that
                                                  at 50 CFR 424.12 (81 FR 7414; February                  that the publication of maps and                      would exceed those caused by predation
                                                  11, 2016), we cannot conclude that                      descriptions outlining the locations of               and other non-catastrophic natural
                                                  critical habitat designation would not be               this species would further facilitate                 factors), requiring a focused and
                                                  beneficial to the species because we                    unauthorized collection and trade, as                 comprehensive approach to reducing
                                                  have found that there are threats to the                collectors would know the exact                       threats. One of the basic measures to
                                                  species’ habitat (the present or                        locations where eastern massasauga                    protect eastern massasauga rattlesnakes
                                                  threatened destruction, modification, or                rattlesnakes occur. While eastern                     from unauthorized collection and trade
                                                  curtailment of its habitat or range                     massasauga rattlesnakes are cryptic in                is restricting access to information
                                                  (Factor A) is a threat to the species).                 coloration, they can still be collected in            pertaining to the location of the species’
                                                  However, we still find that designation                 high numbers during certain parts of                  populations. Publishing maps and
                                                  of critical habitat is not prudent under                their active seasons (for example, spring             narrative descriptions of eastern
                                                  the first circumstance because we have                  egress from hibernation or summer                     massasauga rattlesnake critical habitat
                                                  determined that the eastern massasauga                  gestation). Also, individuals of this                 would significantly affect our ability to
                                                  rattlesnake is threatened by taking or                  species are often slow-moving and have                reduce the threat of persecution, as well
                                                  other human activity and that                           small home ranges. Therefore,                         as unauthorized collection and trade.
                                                  identification of critical habitat can be               publishing specific location information              We have, therefore, determined in
                                                  expected to increase the degree of threat               would provide a high level of assurance               accordance with 50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)
                                                  to the species.                                         that any person going to a specific                   that it is not prudent to designate
                                                     Overutilization in the form of                       location would be able to successfully                critical habitat for the eastern
                                                  poaching and unauthorized collection                    locate and collect specimens, given the               massasauga rattlesnake.
                                                  (Factor B) of the eastern massasauga                    species’ site fidelity and ease of capture
                                                  rattlesnake for the pet trade is a factor               once located. Due to the threat of                    Available Conservation Measures
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  contributing to declines, and remains a                 unauthorized collection and trade, a                     Conservation measures provided to
                                                  threat with significant impact to this                  number of biologists working for State                species listed as endangered or
                                                  species, which has high black market                    and local conservation agencies that                  threatened species under the Act
                                                  value. For example, an investigation                    manage populations of eastern                         include recognition, recovery actions,
                                                  into reptile trafficking reports                        massasauga rattlesnakes have expressed                requirements for Federal protection, and
                                                  documented 35 eastern massasauga                        to the Service serious concerns with                  prohibitions against certain practices.
                                                  rattlesnakes (representing nearly one                   publishing maps and boundary                          The recognition of a species, through
                                                  entire wild source population) collected                descriptions of occupied habitat areas                listing, results in public awareness, and


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00122   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations                                         67213

                                                  conservation by Federal, State, Tribal,                 requires cooperative conservation efforts             Engineers; construction and
                                                  and local agencies; private                             on private, State, and Tribal lands.                  maintenance of roads or highways by
                                                  organizations; and individuals. The Act                    Following publication of this final                the Federal Highway Administration;
                                                  encourages cooperation with the States                  rule, funding for recovery actions will               and construction and maintenance of
                                                  and other countries and requires that                   be available from a variety of sources,               pipelines or rights-of-way for
                                                  recovery actions be carried out for all                 including Federal budgets, State                      transmission of electricity, and other
                                                  listed species. The protection required                 programs, and cost share grants for non-              energy related projects permitted or
                                                  by Federal agencies and the prohibitions                Federal landowners, the academic                      administered by the Federal Energy
                                                  against certain activities are discussed,               community, and nongovernmental                        Regulatory Commission.
                                                  in part, below.                                         organizations. In addition, pursuant to                  Under section 4(d) of the Act, the
                                                     The primary purpose of the Act is the                section 6 of the Act, the States of                   Service has discretion to issue
                                                  conservation of endangered and                          Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan,                    regulations that we find necessary and
                                                  threatened species and the ecosystems                   Minnesota, Missouri, New York, Ohio,                  advisable to provide for the
                                                  upon which they depend. The ultimate                    Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will be                   conservation of threatened species. The
                                                  goal of such conservation efforts is the                eligible for Federal funds to implement               Act and its implementing regulations set
                                                  recovery of these listed species, so that               management actions that promote the                   forth a series of general prohibitions and
                                                  they no longer need the protective                      protection or recovery of the eastern                 exceptions that apply to threatened
                                                  measures of the Act. Subsection 4(f) of                 massasauga rattlesnake. Information on                wildlife. The prohibitions of section
                                                  the Act calls for the Service to develop                our grant programs that are available to              9(a)(1) of the Act, as applied to
                                                  and implement recovery plans for the                    aid species recovery can be found at:                 threatened wildlife and codified at 50
                                                  conservation of endangered and                          http://www.fws.gov/grants.                            CFR 17.31, make it illegal for any person
                                                  threatened species. The recovery                           Please let us know if you are                      subject to the jurisdiction of the United
                                                  planning process involves the                           interested in participating in recovery               States to take (including harass, harm,
                                                  identification of actions that are                      efforts for the eastern massasauga                    pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
                                                  necessary to address the threats to its                 rattlesnake. Additionally, we invite you              capture, or collect; or to attempt any of
                                                  survival and recovery. The goal of this                 to submit any new information on this                 these) threatened wildlife within the
                                                  process is to restore listed species to a               species whenever it becomes available                 United States or on the high seas. In
                                                  point where they are secure, self-                      and any information you may have for                  addition, it is unlawful to import;
                                                  sustaining, and functioning components                  recovery planning purposes (see FOR                   export; deliver, receive, carry, transport,
                                                  of their ecosystems.                                    FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).                         or ship in interstate or foreign
                                                     Recovery planning includes the                          Section 7(a) of the Act requires                   commerce in the course of commercial
                                                  development of a draft and final                        Federal agencies to evaluate their                    activity; or sell or offer for sale in
                                                  recovery plan. The recovery plan also                   actions with respect to any species that              interstate or foreign commerce any
                                                  identifies recovery criteria for review of              is listed as an endangered or threatened              listed species. It is also illegal to
                                                  when a species may be ready for                         species and with respect to its critical              possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or
                                                  downlisting or delisting, and methods                   habitat, if any is designated. Regulations            ship any such wildlife that has been
                                                  for monitoring recovery progress.                       implementing this interagency                         taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply
                                                  Recovery plans also establish a                         cooperation provision of the Act are                  to employees of the Service, the
                                                  framework for agencies to coordinate                    codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section                  National Marine Fisheries Service, other
                                                  their recovery efforts and provide                      7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal                   Federal land management agencies, and
                                                  estimates of the cost of implementing                   agencies to ensure that activities they               State conservation agencies.
                                                  recovery tasks. When completed, the                     authorize, fund, or carry out are not                    We may issue permits to carry out
                                                  draft recovery plan and the final                       likely to jeopardize the continued                    otherwise prohibited activities
                                                  recovery plan will be available on our                  existence of any endangered or                        involving threatened wildlife under
                                                  Web site (http://www.fws.gov/                           threatened species or destroy or                      certain circumstances. Regulations
                                                  endangered), or from our Chicago                        adversely modify its critical habitat. If a           governing permits are codified at 50
                                                  Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR               Federal action may affect a listed                    CFR 17.32. With regard to threatened
                                                  FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).                           species or its critical habitat, the                  wildlife, a permit may be issued for the
                                                  Revisions of the plan may be done to                    responsible Federal agency must enter                 following purposes: For scientific
                                                  address continuing or new threats to the                into consultation with the Service.                   purposes, to enhance the propagation or
                                                  species, as new substantive information                    Federal agency actions within the                  survival of the species, for economic
                                                  becomes available. Implementation of                    species’ habitat that may require                     hardship, for zoological exhibition, for
                                                  recovery actions generally requires the                 conference or consultation or both as                 educational purposes, and for incidental
                                                  participation of a broad range of                       described in the preceding paragraph                  take in connection with otherwise
                                                  partners, including other Federal                       include management and any other                      lawful activities. There are also certain
                                                  agencies, States, Tribes,                               landscape-altering activities on Federal              statutory exemptions from the
                                                  nongovernmental organizations,                          lands administered by the Service                     prohibitions, which are found in
                                                  businesses, and private landowners.                     (Upper Mississippi National Wildlife                  sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
                                                  Examples of recovery actions include                    and Fish Refuge, Wisconsin), U.S.                        It is our policy, as published in the
                                                  habitat restoration (for example,                       Forest Service (Huron-Manistee                        Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
                                                  restoration of native vegetation) and                   National Forest, Michigan), National                  34272), to identify to the maximum
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  management, research, captive                           Park Service (Indiana Dunes National                  extent practicable at the time a species
                                                  propagation and reintroduction, and                     Lakeshore, Indiana), or military lands                is listed, those activities that would or
                                                  outreach and education. The recovery of                 administered by branches of the                       would not constitute a violation of
                                                  many listed species cannot be                           Department of Defense (Fort Grayling,                 section 9 of the Act. The intent of this
                                                  accomplished solely on Federal lands                    Michigan); flood control projects (Lake               policy is to increase public awareness of
                                                  because their range may occur primarily                 Carlyle, Illinois) and issuance of section            the effect of a final listing on proposed
                                                  or solely on non-Federal lands. To                      404 Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et                and ongoing activities within the range
                                                  achieve recovery of these species                       seq.) permits by the U.S. Army Corps of               of the listed species. Based on the best


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00123   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM   30SER1


                                                  67214            Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  available information, the following                      Based on the best available                              References Cited
                                                  activities may potentially result in a                  information, the following actions are                       A complete list of references cited in
                                                  violation of section 9 of the Act; this list            unlikely to result in a violation of                       this rulemaking is available on the
                                                  is not comprehensive:                                   section 9 of the Act, if these activities                  Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
                                                     (1) Development of land or the                       are carried out in accordance with                         and upon request from the Chicago
                                                  conversion of native land to agricultural               existing regulations and permit                            Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
                                                  land, including the construction of any                 requirements; this list is not                             FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
                                                  related infrastructure (for example,                    comprehensive:
                                                  roads, bridges, railroads, pipelines,                                                                              Authors
                                                  utilities) in occupied eastern                            (1) Pre-emergent fire: Prescribed burns
                                                                                                          to control vegetation occurring prior to                     The primary authors of this final rule
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake habitat;                                                                                    are staff members of the Midwest
                                                     (2) Certain dam construction: In an                  eastern massasauga rattlesnake
                                                                                                          emergence from hibernacula (typically                      Regional Office.
                                                  area where the dam alters the habitat
                                                  from native land types (for example,                    in late March to early April); and                         List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
                                                  grassland, swamp, fen, bog, wet prairie,                  (2) Pre-emergent mowing or other                           Endangered and threatened species,
                                                  sedge meadow, marshland, peatland,                      mechanical vegetation removal: Mowing                      Exports, Imports, Reporting and
                                                  floodplain forest, coniferous forest)                   or cutting of vegetation prior to eastern                  recordkeeping requirements,
                                                  causing changes in hydrology at                         massasauga rattlesnake emergence from                      Transportation.
                                                  hibernacula or where the dam causes                     hibernacula.
                                                  fragmentation that separates snakes                                                                                Regulation Promulgation
                                                                                                            Questions regarding whether specific
                                                  from hibernacula or gestational sites;                                                                               Accordingly, we amend part 17,
                                                     (3) Post-emergent prescribed fire:                   activities would constitute a violation of
                                                                                                          section 9 of the Act should be directed                    subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
                                                  Prescribed burns to control vegetation                                                                             Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth
                                                  that are conducted after snakes have                    to the Chicago Ecological Services Field
                                                                                                                                                                     below:
                                                  emerged from their hibernacula and are                  Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
                                                  thus exposed to the fire;                               CONTACT).                                                  PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
                                                     (4) Post-emergent mowing for habitat                 Required Determinations                                    THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
                                                  management: Mowing of vegetation after
                                                  snakes have emerged from hibernacula                    National Environmental Policy Act (42                      ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17
                                                  can cause direct mortality by contact                   U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)                                       continues to read as follows:
                                                  with blades or being run over by tires                                                                               Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
                                                  on mower;                                                  We have determined that                                 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise
                                                     (5) Water level manipulation:                        environmental assessments and                              noted.
                                                  Flooding or hydrologic drawdown                         environmental impact statements, as
                                                                                                          defined under the authority of the                         ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding an
                                                  affecting eastern massasauga rattlesnake                                                                           entry for ‘‘Rattlesnake, eastern
                                                  individuals or habitat, particularly                    National Environmental Policy Act
                                                                                                                                                                     massasauga’’ to the List of Endangered
                                                  hibernacula;                                            (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not
                                                                                                                                                                     and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical
                                                     (6) Certain research activities:                     be prepared in connection with listing
                                                                                                                                                                     order under REPTILES to read as
                                                  Collection and handling of eastern                      a species as an endangered or
                                                                                                                                                                     follows:
                                                  massasauga rattlesnake individuals for                  threatened species under the
                                                  research that may result in displacement                Endangered Species Act. We published                       § 17.11 Endangered and threatened
                                                  or death of the individuals; and                        a notice outlining our reasons for this                    wildlife.
                                                     (7) Poaching, collecting, or                         determination in the Federal Register                      *       *    *       *      *
                                                  persecuting individuals.                                on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).                             (h) * * *

                                                                                                                                                                                                Listing citations and
                                                                   Common name                                  Scientific name                       Where listed               Status           applicable rules


                                                            *                       *                       *                        *                        *                       *                     *
                                                                     REPTILES

                                                           *                  *                             *                       *                     *                           *                        *
                                                  Rattlesnake, eastern massasauga ..............       Sistrurus catenatus ..............   Wherever found ...................   T            [Insert Federal Register
                                                                                                                                                                                                 citation]; 9/30/16.

                                                            *                       *                       *                        *                        *                       *                     *



                                                    Dated: September 21, 2016.
                                                  Stephen Guertin,
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES




                                                  Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
                                                  Service.
                                                  [FR Doc. 2016–23538 Filed 9–29–16; 8:45 am]
                                                  BILLING CODE 4333–15–P




                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:28 Sep 29, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00124   Fmt 4700     Sfmt 9990   E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM     30SER1



Document Created: 2018-02-09 13:34:09
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 13:34:09
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionRules and Regulations
ActionFinal rule.
DatesThis rule is effective October 31, 2016.
ContactLouise Clemency, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chicago Ecological Services Field Office, 230 South Dearborn, Suite 2938, Chicago, IL 60604; telephone 312-216-4720. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877- 8339.
FR Citation81 FR 67193 
RIN Number1018-BA98
CFR AssociatedEndangered and Threatened Species; Exports; Imports; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Transportation

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR